Académique Documents
Professionnel Documents
Culture Documents
QUANTUM JURIS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
RULES ON EVIDENCE Home
CIVIL PROCEDURE
RULES ON EVIDENCE Page 1 EVIDENCE
Page 2 EVIDENCE
Evidence is the
Page 3 EVIDENCE
means,
sanctioned by these rules, Page 4 EVIDENCE
of ascertaining in a judicial proceeding RULES ON EVIDENCE
the truth respecting a matter of fact.(sec. 1 rule 128) NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS
RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
Admissibility of evidence. — Evidence is
admissible when CivPro by Dean Inigo
it is relevant to the issue and is Rules of Civil Proc (enumerations)
not excluded by the law or these rules.(sec. 3 rule 128) 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(15)
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(622)
Relevancy; collateral matters. —
Evidence must have such a 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(2329 Depositions)
relation to the fact in issue 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(3039)
as to induce belief in its existence or nonexistence. 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(4143 APPEALS)
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(4456)
Evidence on collateral matters shall not be allowed,
except when it tends in any reasonable degree 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(5761 Prov
Remedies)
to establish the probability or improbability of the fact in issue.(sec. 4 rule 128)
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(6271 Spl Civil
Action)
Judicial notice, when mandatory. (sec. 1 Rule 129) —
A court shall take judicial notice, without the introduction of evidence,
of the existence and territorial extent of states, Blog Archive
their political history, forms of government and symbols of nationality,
the law of nations, ▼ 2013 (1)
the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals, ▼ January (1)
the political constitution and history of the Philippines, INTRODUCTION
the official acts of legislative, executive and judicial departments of the Philippines,
the laws of nature,
the measure of time, and
the geographical divisions. (1a) law l
LINKS
SUPREME COURT
Judicial notice, when discretionary. (sec. 2 rule 129)—
LawPhilArellano
A court may take judicial notice of matters which are
Chan Robles Virtual Libray
of public knowledge, or are
capable of unquestionable demonstration, or
ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions. (1a)
Judicial notice, when hearing necessary. (sec. 3 rule 129)—
During the trial,
the court, on its own initiative, or on request of a party,
may announce its intention to take judicial notice of any matter and
allow the parties to be heard thereon.
After the trial, and before judgment or on appeal,
the proper court, on its own initiative or on request of a party,
may take judicial notice of any matter and
allow the parties to be heard thereon if such matter is decisive of a material issue in the
case. (n)
Judicial admissions.(sec. 4 rule 129) —
An admission, verbal or written,
made by the party in the course of the proceedings
in the same case, does not require proof.
The admission may be contradicted only
by showing that it was made through palpable mistake or
that no such admission was made. (2a)
RULE 130 Rules of Admissibility
A. OBJECT (REAL) EVIDENCE
Object as evidence.(sec. 1 rule 130) —
Objects as evidence are
those addressed to the senses of the court.
When an object is relevant to the fact in issue,
it may be exhibited to,
examined or viewed by the court. (1a)
B. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
Documentary evidence.(sec. 2 rule 130) —
Documents as evidence consist of writing or any material
containing letters, words, numbers, figures, symbols or other modes of written
expression
offered as proof of their contents. (n)
1. BEST EVIDENCE RULE
Original document must be produced; exceptions. (sec. 3 rule 130)—
When the subject of inquiry is the contents of a document,
no evidence shall be admissible
other than the original document itself,
except in the following cases:
(a)When the original has been lost or destroyed, or
cannot be produced in court,
without bad faith on the part of the offeror;
Secondary Evidence: When original document is unavailable.(sec. 5 rule 130) —
When the original document has been lost or destroyed, or cannot be produced in court,
the offeror, upon proof of its execution or existence and the cause of its unavailability without bad
faith on his part,
may prove its contents by a copy, or
by a recital of its contents in some authentic document, or
by the testimony of witnesses in the order stated. (4a)
(b)When the original is in the custody or under the control of the party
against whom the evidence is offered, and
the latter fails to produce it after reasonable notice;
Secondary Evidence: When original document is in adverse party's custody or control.(sec. 6 rule 130)
—
If the document is in the custody or under the control of adverse party,
he must have reasonable notice to produce it.
If after such notice and after satisfactory proof of its existence,
he fails to produce the document, secondary evidence may be presented as in the case of its loss. (5a)
(c)When the original consists of numerous accounts or
other documents which cannot be examined in court without great loss of time and
the fact sought to be established from them is only the general result of the whole; and
(d)When the original is a public record in the custody of a public officer or
is recorded in a public office. (2a)
Evidence admissible when original document is a public record. (sec. 7 rule 130)—
When the original of document is in the custody of public officer or
is recorded in a public office,
its contents may be proved
by a certified copy issued by the public officer in custody thereof. (2a)
Original of document.(sec. 4 rule 130) —
(a)The original of the document is
one the contents of which are the subject of inquiry.
(b)When a document is in two or more copies
executed at or about the same time,
with identical contents,
all such copies are equally regarded as originals.
(c)When an entry is repeated
in the regular course of business,
one being copied from another
at or near the time of the transaction,
all the entries are likewise equally regarded as originals. (3a)
2. SECONDARY EVIDENCE
When original document is unavailable.(sec. 5 rule 130) —
When the original document has been lost or destroyed, or
cannot be produced in court,
the offeror, upon proof of its execution or existence and
the cause of its unavailability
without bad faith on his part,
may prove its contents
by a copy, or
by a recital of its contents in some authentic document, or
by the testimony of witnesses in the order stated. (4a)
When original document is in adverse party's custody or control.(sec. 6 rule 130) —
If the document is in the custody or under the control of adverse party,
he must have reasonable notice to produce it.
If after such notice and after satisfactory proof of its existence, he fails to produce the
document, secondary evidence may be presented as in the case of its loss. (5a)
Evidence admissible when original document is a public record. (sec. 7 rule 130)—
When the original of document is in the custody of public officer or
is recorded in a public office,
its contents may be proved
by a certified copy issued by the public officer in custody thereof. (2a)
Sec. 8.Party who calls for document not bound to offer it. (sec. 8 rule 130)—
A party who calls for the production of a document and inspects the same
is not obliged to offer it as evidence. (6a)
3. PAROL EVIDENCE RULE
Evidence of written agreements. (sec. 9 rule 130)—
When the terms of an agreement have been reduced to writing,
it is considered as containing all the terms agreed upon and
there can be, between the parties and their successors in interest,
no evidence of such terms other than the contents of the written agreement.
However, a party may present evidence to modify, explain or add
to the terms of written agreement if he puts in issue in his pleading:
(a)An intrinsic ambiguity, mistake or imperfection in the written agreement;
(b)The failure of the written agreement to express the true intent and agreement of the
parties thereto;
(c)The validity of the written agreement; or
(d)The existence of other terms agreed to by the parties or their successors in interest
after the execution of the written agreement.
The term "agreement" includes wills. (7a)
4. INTERPRETATION OF DOCUMENTS
Interpretation of a writing according to its legal meaning.(sec. 10 rule 130) —
The language of a writing is to be interpreted according to the legal meaning
it bears in the place of its execution,
unless the parties intended otherwise. (8)
Instrument construed so as to give effect to all provisions.(sec. 11 rule 130) —
In the construction of an instrument, where there are several provisions or particulars,
such a construction is, if possible, to be adopted as will give effect to all. (9)
Interpretation according to intention; general and particular provisions.(sec. 12 rule 130)
—
In the construction of an instrument, the intention of the parties is to be pursued;
and when a general and a particular provision are inconsistent,
the latter is paramount to the former.
So a particular intent will control a general one that is inconsistent with it. (10)
Interpretation according to circumstances. (sec. 13 rule 130)—
For the proper construction of an instrument,
the circumstances under which it was made,
including the situation of the subject thereof and of the parties to it, may be shown,
so that the judge may be placed in the position of those whose language he is to
interpret. (11)
Peculiar signification of terms (sec. 14 rule 130). —
The terms of a writing are presumed to have been used
in their primary and general acceptation,
but evidence is admissible to show that
they have a local, technical, or otherwise peculiar signification,
and were so used and understood in the particular instance, in which case the
agreement must be construed accordingly. (12)
Written words control printed. (sec. 15 rule 130)—
When an instrument consists partly of written words and partly of a printed form, and
the two are inconsistent, the former controls the latter. (13)
Experts and interpreters to be used in explaining certain writings. (sec. 16 rule 130)—
When the characters in which an instrument is written are difficult to be deciphered, or
the language is not understood by the court,
the evidence of persons skilled in deciphering the characters, or
who understand the language,
is admissible to declare the characters or the meaning of the language. (14)
Of Two constructions, which preferred.(sec. 17 rule 130) —
When the terms of an agreement
have been intended in a different sense
by the different parties to it,
that sense is to prevail against either party in which he supposed the other understood
it,
and when different constructions of a provision are otherwise equally proper,
that is to be taken which is the most favorable to the party in whose favor the provision
was made. (15)
Sec. 18.Construction in favor of natural right. (sec. 18 rule 130)—
When an instrument is equally susceptible of two interpretations,
one in favor of natural right and the other against it, the former is to be adopted. (16)
Interpretation according to usage. (sec. 19 rule 130)—An instrument may be construed
according to usage, in order to determine its true character. (17)
C. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
1. QUALIFICATION OF WITNESSES
Witnesses; their qualifications.(sec. 20 rule 130) —
Except as provided in the next succeeding section,
all persons who can perceive, and perceiving,
can make their known perception to others, may be witnesses.
Religious or political belief, interest in the outcome of the case, or conviction of a crime
unless otherwise provided by law, shall not be ground for disqualification. (18a)
Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity. (sec. 21 rule 130)—
The following persons cannot be witnesses:
(a)Those whose mental condition,
at the time of their production for examination,
is such that they are incapable of intelligently making known their perception to others;
(b)Children whose mental maturity
is such as to render them incapable of perceiving the facts
respecting which they are examined and of relating them truthfully. (19a)
Disqualification by reason of marriage.(sec. 22 rule 130) —
During their marriage, neither the husband nor the wife
may testify for or against the other
without the consent of the affected spouse,
except in a civil case by one against the other, or
in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or
the latter's direct descendants or ascendants. (20a)
Disqualification by reason of privileged communication.(sec. 24 rule 130) —
The following persons cannot testify as to matters learned in confidence in the following
cases:
(a)The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage,
cannot be examined without the consent of the other
as to any communication received in confidence by one from the other
during the marriage
except in a civil case by one against the other, or
in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or the latter's direct
descendants or ascendants;
2. TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE
Parental and filial privilege. (sec. 25 rule 130)—
No person may be compelled to testify against his parents, other direct ascendants,
children or other direct descendants. (20a)
Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of adverse party.(sec. 23 rule 130) —
Parties or assignor of parties to a case, or persons in whose behalf a case is
prosecuted,
against an executor or administrator or other representative of a deceased person, or
against a person of unsound mind,
upon a claim or demand against the estate of such deceased person or
against such person of unsound mind,
cannot testify as to any matter of fact
occurring before the death of such deceased person or
before such person became of unsound mind. (20a)
Disqualification by reason of privileged communication.(sec. 24 rule 130) —
The following persons cannot testify as to matters learned in confidence in the
following cases:
(a)The husband or the wife, during or after the marriage,
cannot be examined without the consent of the other
as to any communication received in confidence
by one from the other during the marriage
except in a civil case by one against the other,
or in a criminal case for a crime committed by one against the other or
the latter's direct descendants or ascendants;
(b)An attorney cannot, without the consent of his client,
be examined as to any communication made by the client to him, or
his advice given thereon in the course of, or with a view to, professional employment,
nor can an attorney's secretary, stenographer, or clerk be examined,
without the consent of the client and his employer,
concerning any fact the knowledge of which has been acquired in such capacity;
(c)A person authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics
cannot in a civil case, without the consent of the patient,
be examined as to any advice or treatment given by him or
any information which he may have acquired in attending such patient in a professional
capacity, which information was necessary to enable him to act in capacity, and
which would blacken the reputation of the patient;
(d)A minister or priest cannot,
without the consent of the person making the confession,
be examined as to any confession made to or
any advice given by him in his professional character
in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which the minister or priest
belongs;
(e)A public officer cannot be examined
during his term of office or afterwards,
as to communications made to him in official confidence,
when the court finds that the public interest would suffer by the disclosure. (21a)
2. TESTIMONIAL PRIVILEGE
Parental and filial privilege.(sec. 25 rule 130) —
No person may be compelled to testify against his parents, other direct ascendants,
children or other direct descendants. (20a)
3. ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS
Admission of a party. (sec. 26 rule 130)—
The act, declaration or omission of a party
as to a relevant fact may be given in evidence against him. (22)
Offer of compromise not admissible.(sec. 27 rule 130) —
In civil cases, an offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability,
and is not admissible in evidence against the offeror.
In criminal cases,
except those involving quasioffenses (criminal negligence) or
those allowed by law to be compromised,
an offer of compromised by the accused
may be received in evidence as an implied admission of guilt.
A plea of guilty later withdrawn, or
an unaccepted offer of a plea of guilty to lesser offense,
is not admissible in evidence against the accused who made the plea or offer.
An offer to pay or the payment of medical, hospital or other expenses occasioned by an
injury is not admissible in evidence as proof of civil or criminal liability for the injury.
(24a)
Admission by third party.(sec. 28 rule 130) — RES INTER ALIOS ACTA
The rights of a party cannot be prejudiced
by an act, declaration, or omission of another,
except as hereinafter provided. (25a)
Admission by copartner or agent. (sec. 29 rule 130)—
The act or declaration of a partner or agent of the party
within the scope of his authority and
during the existence of the partnership or agency,
may be given in evidence against such party
after the partnership or agency is shown by evidence other than such act or declaration.
The same rule applies to the act or declaration of a joint owner, joint debtor, or other
person jointly interested with the party. (26a)
Admission by conspirator.(sec. 30 rule 130) —
The act or declaration of a conspirator relating to the conspiracy and during its
existence,
may be given in evidence against the coconspirator
after the conspiracy is shown by evidence other than such act of declaration. (27)
Admission by privies. (sec. 31 rule 130)—
Where one derives title to property from another,
the act, declaration, or omission of the latter,
while holding the title, in relation to the property, is evidence against the former. (28)
Admission by silence.( sec. 32 rule 130)—
An act or declaration made in the presence and
within the hearing or observation of a party who does or says nothing
when the act or declaration is such as naturally to call for action or comment if not true,
and when proper and possible for him to do so,
may be given in evidence against him. (23a)
Confession.(sec. 33 rule 130) —
The declaration of an accused acknowledging his guilt of the offense charged,
or of any offense necessarily included therein,
may be given in evidence against him. (29a)
4. PREVIOUS CONDUCT AS EVIDENCE
Similar acts as evidence. (sec. 34 rule 130)—
Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time
is not admissible to prove that
he did or did not do the same or similar thing at another time;
but it may be received to prove a specific intent or knowledge; identity, plan, system,
scheme, habit, custom or usage, and the like. (48a)
Unaccepted offer.(sec. 35 rule 130) —
An offer in writing to pay a particular sum of money or
to deliver a written instrument or specific personal property is,
if rejected without valid cause,
equivalent to the actual production and
tender of the money, instrument, or property. (49a)
5. TESTIMONIAL KNOWLEDGE
Testimony generally confined to personal knowledge; hearsay excluded. (sec. 36 rule
130)—
A witness can testify only to those facts which he knows of his personal knowledge;
that is, which are derived from his own perception, except as otherwise provided in
these rules. (30a)
6. EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE
Dying declaration. (sec. 37 rule 130)—
The declaration of a dying person,
made under the consciousness of an impending death,
may be received in any case wherein his death is the subject of inquiry,
as evidence of the cause and surrounding circumstances of such death. (31a)
Part of res gestae. (sec. 42 rule 130)—
Statements made by a person
while a starting occurrence is taking place or immediately prior or
subsequent thereto with respect to the circumstances thereof,
may be given in evidence as part of res gestae.
So, also, statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue, and giving it a legal
significance, may be received as part of the res gestae. (36a)
Declaration against interest.(sec. 38 rule 130) —
The declaration made by a person deceased, or unable to testify,
against the interest of the declarant,
if the fact is asserted in the declaration was
at the time it was made so far contrary to declarant's own interest,
that a reasonable man in his position would not have made the declaration
unless he believed it to be true,
may be received in evidence against himself or
his successors in interest and against third persons. (32a)law library
Act or declaration about pedigree.(sec. 39 rule 130) —
The act or declaration of a person deceased, or unable to testify,
in respect to the pedigree of another person related to him by birth or marriage,
may be received in evidence where it occurred before the controversy, and
the relationship between the two persons is shown
by evidence other than such act or declaration.
The word "pedigree" includes relationship, family genealogy, birth, marriage, death, the
dates when and the places where these fast occurred, and the names of the relatives. It
embraces also facts of family history intimately connected with pedigree. (33a)
Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree. (sec. 40 rule 130)—
The reputation or tradition existing in a family previous to the controversy,
in respect to the pedigree of any one of its members,
may be received in evidence if the witness testifying thereon be also a member of the
family, either by consanguinity or affinity.
Entries in family bibles or other family books or charts, engravings on rings, family
portraits and the like, may be received as evidence of pedigree. (34a)
Common reputation. (sec. 41 rule 130)—
Common reputation existing previous to the controversy,
respecting facts of public or general interest more than thirty years old, or
respecting marriage or moral character, may be given in evidence.
Monuments and inscriptions in public places may be received as evidence of common
reputation. (35)
Part of res gestae. (sec. 42 rule 130)—
Statements made by a person
while a starting occurrence is taking place or immediately prior or
subsequent thereto with respect to the circumstances thereof,
may be given in evidence as part of res gestae.
So, also, statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue, and giving it
a legal significance, may be received as part of the res gestae. (36a)
Entries in the course of business. (sec. 43 rule 130)—
Entries made at, or near the time of transactions to which they refer,
by a person deceased, or unable to testify,
who was in a position to know the facts therein stated,
may be received as prima facie evidence,
if such person made the entries in his professional capacity or
in the performance of duty and in the ordinary or regular course of business or duty.
(37a)
Sec. 44.Entries in official records. —
Entries in official records made in the performance of his duty
by a public officer of the Philippines, or
by a person in the performance of a duty specially enjoined by law,
are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated. (38)
Commercial lists and the like. (sec. 45 rule 130)—
Evidence of statements of matters of interest to persons
engaged in an occupation contained in a list, register, periodical, or other published
compilation
is admissible as tending to prove the truth of any relevant matter so stated
if that compilation is published for use by persons engaged in that occupation and
is generally used and relied upon by them therein. (39)
Learned treatises. (sec. 46 rule 130)—
A published treatise, periodical or pamphlet on a subject of history, law, science, or art
is admissible as tending to prove the truth of a matter stated therein
if the court takes judicial notice, or a witness expert in the subject testifies,
that the writer of the statement in the treatise, periodical or pamphlet is recognized in
his profession or calling as expert in the subject. (40a)
Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding.(sec. 47 rule 130) —
The testimony or deposition of a witness deceased or unable to testify,
given in a former case or proceeding, judicial or administrative,
involving the same parties and subject matter, may be given in evidence against the
adverse party who had the opportunity to crossexamine him. (41a)
7. OPINION RULE
General rule. Sec. 48 rule 130)—
The opinion of witness is not admissible,
except as indicated in the following sections. (42)
Opinion of expert witness.(sec. 49 rule 130) —
The opinion of a witness on a matter requiring
special knowledge, skill, experience or training which he shown to possess,
may be received in evidence. (43a)
Opinion of ordinary witnesses. (sec. 50 Rule 130)—
The opinion of a witness for which proper basis is given, may be received in evidence
regarding —
(a)the identity of a person about whom he has adequate knowledge;
(b)A handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity; and
(c)The mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted.
The witness may also testify on his impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or
appearance of a person. (44a)
8. CHARACTER EVIDENCE
Character evidence not generally admissible; exceptions: (sec. 51 rule 130)—
(a)In Criminal Cases:
(1)The accused may prove his good moral character
which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged.
(2)Unless in rebuttal, the prosecution may not prove his bad moral character
which is pertinent to the moral trait involved in the offense charged.
(3)The good or bad moral character of the offended party may be proved
if it tends to establish in any reasonable degree
the probability or improbability of the offense charged.
(b)In Civil Cases:
Evidence of the moral character of a party in civil case
is admissible only when pertinent to the issue of character involved in the case.
(c)In the case provided for in Rule 132, Section 14, (46a, 47a)
RULE 131 Burden of Proof and Presumptions
Burden of proof.(sec. 1 rule 131) —
Burden of proof is the duty of a party to present evidence
on the facts in issue necessary to establish his claim or defense
by the amount of evidence required by law. (1a, 2a)
Conclusive presumptions.(sec. 2 rule 131) —
The following are instances of conclusive presumptions:
(a)Whenever a party has, by his own declaration, act, or omission,
intentionally and deliberately led another to believe a particular thing true, and
to act upon such belief, he cannot, in any litigation arising out of such declaration, act
or omission,
be permitted to falsify it:
(b)The tenant is not permitted to deny the title of his landlord
at the time of commencement of the relation of landlord and tenant between them. (3a)
FAMILY CODE: (SEC. 3 RULE 131)
(w)That after an absence of seven (7) years, it being unknown whether or not the
absentee still lives, he is considered dead for all purposes, except for those of
succession.
The absentee shall not be considered dead for the purpose of opening his succession
till after an absence of ten(10)years.
If he disappeared after the age of seventyfive (75) years, an absence of five(5) years
shall be sufficient in order that his succession may be opened.
The following shall be considered dead for all purposes including the division of the
estate among the heirs:
(1)A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an
aircraft with is missing, who has not been heard of for four years
since the loss of the vessel or aircraft;
(2)A member of the armed forces who has taken part in armed
hostilities, and has been missing for four years;
(3)A person who has been in danger of death under other
circumstances and whose existence has not been known for four
years;
(4)If a married person has been absent for four consecutive
years, the spouse present may contract a subsequent marriage if
he or she has wellfounded belief that the absent spouse is
already death.
In case of disappearance, where there is a danger of death the
circumstances hereinabove provided, an absence of only two
years shall be sufficient for the purpose of contracting a
subsequent marriage.
However, in any case, before marrying again, the spouse present
must institute a summary proceedings as provided in the Family
Code and in the rules for declaration of presumptive death of the
absentee, without prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the
absent spouse.l
(bb)That property acquired by a man and a woman who are capacitated to marry each
other and who live exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the benefit
of marriage or under void marriage, has been obtained by their joint efforts, work or
industry. (sec. 147 Civil Code)
(cc)That in cases of cohabitation by a man and a woman who are not capacitated to
marry each other and who have acquire properly through their actual joint contribution
of money, property or industry, such contributions and their corresponding shares
including joint deposits of money and evidences of credit are equal. (sec. 148 civil code)
(dd)That if the marriage is terminated and the mother contracted another marriage
within three hundred days after such termination of the former marriage, these rules
shall govern in the absence of proof to the contrary:
(1)A child born before one hundred eighty days after the
solemnization of the subsequent marriage is considered to have
been conceived during such marriage, even though it be born
within the three hundred days after the termination of the former
marriage.
(2)A child born after one hundred eighty days following the
celebration of the subsequent marriage is considered to have
been conceived during such marriage, even though it be born
within the three hundred days after the termination of the former
marriage.
(jj)That except for purposes of succession, when two persons perish in the same
calamity, such as wreck, battle, or conflagration, and it is not shown who died first, and
there are no particular circumstances from which it can be inferred, the survivorship is
determined from the probabilities resulting from the strength and the age of the sexes,
according to the following rules:
1.If both were under the age of fifteen years, the older is deemed to have
survived;
2.If both were above the age sixty, the younger is deemed to have survived;
3.If one is under fifteen and the other above sixty, the former is deemed to have
survived;
4.If both be over fifteen and under sixty, and the sex be different, the male is
deemed to have survived, if the sex be the same, the older;
5.If one be under fifteen or over sixty, and the other between those ages, the
latter is deemed to have survived.
Sec. 4. Rule 131 No presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy. —
There is no presumption of legitimacy of a child born
after three hundred days following the dissolution of the marriage or the separation of
the spouses. Whoever alleges the legitimacy or illegitimacy of such child must prove
his allegation. (6)
Disputable presumptions. — (sec. 3 rule 131)
The following presumptions are satisfactory if uncontradicted, but may be contradicted
and overcome by other evidence:
(a)That a person is innocent of crime or wrong;
(b)That an unlawful act was done with an unlawful intent;
(c)That a person intends the ordinary consequences of his voluntary act;
(d)That a person takes ordinary care of his concerns;
(e)That evidence willfully suppressed would be adverse if produced;
(f)That money paid by one to another was due to the latter;
(g)That a thing delivered by one to another belonged to the latter;
(h)That an obligation delivered up to the debtor has been paid;
(i)That prior rents or installments had been paid when a receipt for the later one is
produced;
(j)That a person found in possession of a thing taken in the doing of a recent wrongful
act is the taker and the doer of the whole act; otherwise, that things which a person
possess, or exercises acts of ownership over, are owned by him;
(k)That a person in possession of an order on himself for the payment of the money, or
the delivery of anything, has paid the money or delivered the thing accordingly;
(l)That a person acting in a public office was regularly appointed or elected to it;
(m)That official duty has been regularly performed;
(n)That a court, or judge acting as such, whether in the Philippines or elsewhere, was
acting in the lawful exercise of jurisdiction;
(o)That all the matters within an issue raised in a case were laid before the court and
passed upon by it; and in like manner that all matters within an issue raised in a dispute
submitted for arbitration were laid before the arbitrators and passed upon by them;
(p)That private transactions have been fair and regular;
(q)That the ordinary course of business has been followed;
(r)That there was a sufficient consideration for a contract;
(s)That a negotiable instrument was given or indorsed for a sufficient consideration;
(t)That an endorsement of negotiable instrument was made before the instrument was
overdue and at the place where the instrument is dated;
(u)That a writing is truly dated;
(v)That a letter duly directed and mailed was received in the regular course of the mail;
(w)That after an absence of seven(7) years, it being unknown whether or not the
absentee still lives, he is considered dead for all purposes, except for those of
succession.
The absentee shall not be considered dead for the purpose of opening his succession
till after an absence of ten years.
If he disappeared after the age of seventyfive years, an absence of five years shall be
sufficient in order that his succession may be opened.
The following shall be considered dead for all purposes including the division of the
estate among the heirs:
(1)A person on board a vessel lost during a sea voyage, or an
aircraft with is missing, who has not been heard of for four years
since the loss of the vessel or aircraft;
(2)A member of the armed forces who has taken part in armed
hostilities, and has been missing for four years;
(3)A person who has been in danger of death under other
circumstances and whose existence has not been known for four
years;
(4)If a married person has been absent for four consecutive
years, the spouse present may contract a subsequent marriage if
he or she has wellfounded belief that the absent spouse is
already death.
In case of disappearance, where there is a danger of death the
circumstances hereinabove provided, an absence of only two
years shall be sufficient for the purpose of contracting a
subsequent marriage.
However, in any case, before marrying again, the spouse present
must institute a summary proceedings as provided in the Family
Code and in the rules for declaration of presumptive death of the
absentee, without prejudice to the effect of reappearance of the
absent spouse.l
(x)That acquiescence resulted from a belief that the thing acquiesced in was
conformable to the law or fact;
(y)That things have happened according to the ordinary course of nature and ordinary
nature habits of life;
(z)That persons acting as copartners have entered into a contract of copartneship;
(aa)That a man and woman deporting themselves as husband and wife have entered
into a lawful contract of marriage;
(bb)That property acquired by a man and a woman who are capacitated to marry each
other and who live exclusively with each other as husband and wife without the benefit
of marriage or under void marriage, has been obtained by their joint efforts, work or
industry.
(cc)That in cases of cohabitation by a man and a woman who are not capacitated to
marry each other and who have acquire properly through their actual joint contribution
of money, property or industry, such contributions and their corresponding shares
including joint deposits of money and evidences of credit are equal.law library
(dd)That if the marriage is terminated and the mother contracted another marriage
within three hundred days after such termination of the former marriage, these rules
shall govern in the absence of proof to the contrary:
(1)A child born before one hundred eighty days after the
solemnization of the subsequent marriage is considered to have
been conceived during such marriage, even though it be born
within the three hundred days after the termination of the former
marriage.
(2)A child born after one hundred eighty days following the
celebration of the subsequent marriage is considered to have
been conceived during such marriage, even though it be born
within the three hundred days after the termination of the former
marriage.
(ee)That a thing once proved to exist continues as long as is usual with things of the
nature;
(ff)That the law has been obeyed;
(gg)That a printed or published book, purporting to be printed or published by public
authority, was so printed or published;
(hh)That a printed or published book, purporting contain reports of cases adjudged in
tribunals of the country where the book is published, contains correct reports of such
cases;
(ii)That a trustee or other person whose duty it was to convey real property to a
particular person has actually conveyed it to him when such presumption is necessary
to perfect the title of such person or his successor in interest;
(jj)That except for purposes of succession, when two persons perish in the same
calamity, such as wreck, battle, or conflagration, and it is not shown who died first, and
there are no particular circumstances from which it can be inferred, the survivorship is
determined from the probabilities resulting from the strength and the age of the sexes,
according to the following rules:
1.If both were under the age of fifteen years, the older is deemed to have
survived;
2.If both were above the age sixty, the younger is deemed to have survived;
3.If one is under fifteen and the other above sixty, the former is deemed to have
survived;
4.If both be over fifteen and under sixty, and the sex be different, the male is
deemed to have survived, if the sex be the same, the older;
5.If one be under fifteen or over sixty, and the other between those ages, the
latter is deemed to have survived.
(kk)That if there is a doubt, as between two or more persons who are called to succeed
each other, as to which of them died first, whoever alleges the death of one prior to the
other, shall prove the same; in the absence of proof, they shall be considered to have
died at the same time. (5a)
Sec. 4.No presumption of legitimacy or illegitimacy. — There is no presumption of
legitimacy of a child born after three hundred days following the dissolution of the
marriage or the separation of the spouses. Whoever alleges the legitimacy or
illegitimacy of such child must prove his allegation. (6)
RULE 132 PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
A. EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
Examination to be done in open court. (sec. 1 rule 132)—
The examination of witnesses presented in a trial or hearing
shall be done in open court, and under oath or affirmation.
Unless the witness is incapacitated to speak, or the questions calls for a different mode
of answer, the answers of the witness shall be given orally. (1a)
Proceedings to be recorded. (sec. 2 rule 132)—
The entire proceedings of a trial or hearing,
including the questions propounded to a witness and his answers thereto,
the statements made by the judge or any of the parties, counsel, or witnesses with
reference to the case,
shall be recorded by means of shorthand or stenotype or by other means of recording
found suitable by the court.
A transcript of the record of the proceedings made by the official stenographer,
stenotypist or recorder and certified as correct by him shall be deemed prima facie a
correct statement of such proceedings. (2a)
Rights and obligations of a witness. (sec. 3 rule 132)—
A witness must answer questions,
although his answer may tend to establish a claim against him.
However, it is the right of a witness:
(1)To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions, and from harsh or
insulting demeanor;
(2)Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice require;
(3)Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue;
(4)Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an offense
unless otherwise provided by law; or
(5)Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his reputation,
unless it to be the very fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact in issue would be
presumed.
But a witness must answer to the fact of his previous final conviction for an offense.
(3a, 19a)
Order in the examination of an individual witness. (sec. 4 rule 132)—
The order in which the individual witness may be examined is as follows;
(a)Direct examination by the proponent;
(b)Crossexamination by the opponent;
(c)Redirect examination by the proponent;
(d)Recrossexamination by the opponent. (4)
Direct examination. (sec. 5 rule 132)—
Direct examination is the examinationinchief of a witness
by the party presenting him on the facts relevant to the issue. (5a)
Crossexamination; its purpose and extent.(sec. 6 rule 132) —
Upon the termination of the direct examination,
the witness may be crossexamined by the adverse party
as to any matters stated in the direct examination, or connected therewith,
with sufficient fullness and freedom to test his accuracy and truthfulness and
freedom from interest or bias, or the reverse, and
to elicit all important facts bearing upon the issue. (8a)
Redirect examination; its purpose and extent. (sec. 7 rule 132)—
After the crossexamination of the witness has been concluded,
he may be reexamined by the party calling him,
to explain or supplement his answers given during the crossexamination.
On redirectexamination, questions on matters not dealt with during the cross
examination, may be allowed by the court in its discretion. (12)
Recrossexamination.(sec. 8 rule 132) —
Upon the conclusion of the redirect examination,
the adverse party may recrossexamine the witness on matters stated in his redirect
examination, and also on such other matters as may be allowed by the court in its
discretion. (13)
Recalling witness. (sec. 9 rule 132)—
After the examination of a witness by both sides has been concluded,
the witness cannot be recalled without leave of the court.
The court will grant or withhold leave in its discretion, as the interests of justice may
require. (14)
Leading and misleading questions.(sec. 10 rule 132) —
A question which suggests to the witness the answer which the examining party desires
is a leading question. It is not allowed, except: library
(a)On cross examination;
(b)On preliminary matters;
(c)When there is a difficulty in getting direct and intelligible answers from a witness who
is ignorant, or a child of tender years, or is of feeble mind, or a deafmute;
(d)Of an unwilling or hostile witness; or
(e)Of a witness who is an adverse party or an officer, director, or managing agent of a
public or private corporation or of a partnership or association which is an adverse
party.
A misleading question is one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the
witness,
or contrary to that which he has previously stated. It is not allowed. (5a, 6a, and 8a)
Impeachment of adverse party's witness. (sec. 11 rule 132)—
A witness may be impeached by the party against whom he was called,
by contradictory evidence,
by evidence that his general reputation for truth, honestly, or integrity is bad, or
by evidence that he has made at other times statements inconsistent with his present,
testimony,
but not by evidence of particular wrongful acts,
except that it may be shown by the examination of the witness, or the record of the
judgment, that he has been convicted of an offense. (15)
Party may not impeach his own witness.(sec. 12 rule 132) —
Except with respect to witnesses referred to in paragraphs (d) and (e) of Section 10, the
party producing a witness is not allowed to impeach his credibility.
A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile
only if so declared by the court
upon adequate showing of his adverse interest,
unjustified reluctance to testify, or
his having misled the party into calling him to the witness stand.
The unwilling or hostile witness so declared, or the witness who is an adverse party,
may be impeached by the party presenting him in all respects
as if he had been called by the adverse party,
except by evidence of his bad character.
He may also be impeached and crossexamined by the adverse party,
but such crossexamination must only be on the subject matter of his examinationin
chief. (6a, 7a)
How witness impeached by evidence of inconsistent statements.(sec. 13 rule 132) —
Before a witness can be impeached by evidence
that he has made at other times statements inconsistent with his present testimony,
the statements must be related to him, with the circumstances of the times and places
and the persons present, and
he must be asked whether he made such statements, and if so, allowed to explain them.
If the statements be in writing they must be shown to the witness before any question is
put to him concerning them. (16)
Evidence of good character of witness.(sec. 14 rule 132) —
Evidence of the good character of a witness is not admissible until such character has
been impeached. (17)
Exclusion and separation of witnesses.(sec. 15 rule 132) —
On any trial or hearing, the judge may exclude from the court any witness not at the
time under examination, so that he may not hear the testimony of other witnesses. The
judge may also cause witnesses to be kept separate and to be prevented from
conversing with one another until all shall have been examined. (18)
When witness may refer to memorandum. (sec. 16 rule 132)—
A witness may be allowed to refresh his memory respecting a fact,
by anything written or recorded by himself or
under his direction at the time when the fact occurred, or immediately thereafter, or
at any other time when the fact was fresh in his memory and
knew that the same was correctly written or recorded;
but in such case the writing or record must be produced and
may be inspected by the adverse party, who may, if he chooses, cross examine the
witness upon it, and may read it in evidence.
So, also, a witness may testify from such writing or record, though he retain no
recollection of the particular facts, if he is able to swear that the writing or record
correctly stated the transaction when made; but such evidence must be received with
caution. (10a)
When part of transaction, writing or record given in evidence, the remainder, the
remainder admissible.(sec. 17 rule 132) —
When part of an act, declaration, conversation, writing or record is given in evidence by
one party, the whole of the same subject may be inquired into by the other, and when a
detached act, declaration, conversation, writing or record is given in evidence, any
other act, declaration, conversation, writing or record necessary to its understanding
may also be given in evidence. (11a)
Right to respect writing shown to witness. (sec. 18 rule 132)—
Whenever a writing is shown to a witness, it may be inspected by the adverse party. (9a)
B. AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS
Classes of Documents.(sec. 19 rule 132) —
For the purpose of their presentation evidence, documents are either public or private.
Public documents are:
(a)The written official acts, or
records of the official acts
of the sovereign authority, official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether of
the Philippines, or of a foreign country;
(b)Documents acknowledge before a notary public except last wills and testaments; and
(c)Public records, kept in the Philippines,
of private documents required by law to the entered therein.
All other writings are private. (20a)
Proof of private document. (sec. 20 rule 132)—
Before any private document offered as authentic, is received in evidence, its due
execution and authenticity must be proved either:
(a)By anyone who saw the document executed or written; orca law library
(b)By evidence of the genuineness of the signature or handwriting of the maker.
Any other private document need only be identified as that which it is claimed to be.
(21a)
When evidence of authenticity of private document not necessary. (sec. 21 rule 132)—
Where a private document is more than thirty years old,
is produced from the custody in which it would naturally be found if genuine,
and is unblemished by any alterations or circumstances of suspicion,
no other evidence of its authenticity need be given. (22a)
How genuineness of handwriting proved. (sec. 22 rule 132)—
The handwriting of a person may be proved
by any witness who believes it to be the handwriting of such person
because he has seen the person write, or
has seen writing purporting to be his upon which the witness has acted or been
charged, and
has thus acquired knowledge of the handwriting of such person.
Evidence respecting the handwriting may also be given by a comparison,
made by the witness or the court,
with writings admitted or treated as genuine by the party against whom the evidence is
offered,
or proved to be genuine to the satisfaction of the judge. (23a)
Public documents as evidence. (sec. 23 rule 132)—
Documents consisting of entries in public records
made in the performance of a duty by a public officer
are prima facie evidence of the facts therein stated.
All other public documents are evidence, even against a third person,
of the fact which gave rise to their execution and of the date of the latter. (24a)
Proof of official record.(sec. 24 rule 132) —
The record of public documents referred to in paragraph (a) of Section 19,
when admissible for any purpose, may be evidenced by an official publication thereof or
by a copy attested by the officer having the legal custody of the record, or
by his deputy, and accompanied,
if the record is not kept in the Philippines, with a certificate that such officer has the
custody.
If the office in which the record is kept is in foreign country,
the certificate may be made by a secretary of the embassy or legation, consul general,
consul, vice consul, or consular agent or
by any officer in the foreign service of the Philippines stationed in the foreign country in
which the record is kept, and authenticated by the seal of his office. (25a)
What attestation of copy must state.(sec. 25 rule 132) —
Whenever a copy of a document or record is attested for the purpose of evidence,
the attestation must state, in substance, that the copy is a correct copy of the original,
or a specific part thereof, as the case may be.
The attestation must be under the official seal of the attesting officer, if there be any, or
if he be the clerk of a court having a seal, under the seal of such court. (26a)
Irremovability of public record.(sec. 26 rule 132) —
Any public record, an official copy of which is admissible in evidence,
must not be removed from the office in which it is kept,
except upon order of a court where the inspection of the record is essential to the just
determination of a pending case. (27a)
Public record of a private document.(sec. 27 rule 132) —
An authorized public record of a private document
may be proved by the original record, or
by a copy thereof, attested by the legal custodian of the record,
with an appropriate certificate that such officer has the custody. (28a)
Proof of lack of record. (sec. 28 rule 132)—
A written statement signed by an officer having the custody of an official record or by
his deputy
that after diligent search no record or entry of a specified tenor is found to exist in the
records of his office,
accompanied by a certificate as above provided, is admissible as evidence that the
records of his office contain no such record or entry. (29)
How judicial record impeached. (sec. 29 rule 132)—
Any judicial record may be impeached by evidence of:
(a) want of jurisdiction in the court or judicial officer,
(b) collusion between the parties, or
(c) fraud in the party offering the record, in respect to the proceedings. (30a)
Proof of notarial documents.(sec. 30 rule 132) —
Every instrument duly acknowledged or proved and certified as provided by law,
may be presented in evidence without further proof,
the certificate of acknowledgment being prima facie evidence of the execution of the
instrument or document involved. (31a)
Alteration in document, how to explain.(sec. 31 rule 132) —
The party producing a document as genuine
which has been altered and appears to have been altered after its execution,
in a part material to the question in dispute,
must account for the alteration.
He may show that the alteration was made by another, without his concurrence, or
was made with the consent of the parties affected by it, or
was otherwise properly or innocent made, or
that the alteration did not change the meaning or language of the instrument.
If he fails to do that, the document shall not be admissible in evidence. (32a)
Seal.(sec. 32 rule 132) —
There shall be no difference between sealed and unsealed private documents insofar as
their admissibility as evidence is concerned. (33a)
Documentary evidence in an unofficial language. (sec. 33 rule 132)—
Documents written in an unofficial language shall not be admitted as evidence,
unless accompanied with a translation into English or Filipino.
To avoid interruption of proceedings, parties or their attorneys are directed to have
such translation prepared before trial. (34a)
C. OFFER AND OBJECTION
Offer of evidence.(sec. 34 rule 132) —
The court shall consider no evidence which has not been formally offered.
The purpose for which the evidence is offered must be specified. (35)
When to make offer.(sec. 35 rule 132) —
As regards the testimony of a witness,
the offer must be made at the time the witness is called to testify.
Documentary and object evidence shall be offered after the presentation of a party's
testimonial evidence. Such offer shall be done orally unless allowed by the court to be
done in writing. (n)
Objection.(sec. 36 rule 132) —
Objection to evidence offered orally must be made immediately after the offer is made.
Objection to a question propounded in the course of the oral examination of a witness
shall be made as soon as the grounds therefor shall become reasonably apparent.
An offer of evidence in writing shall be objected to within three (3) days after notice of
the unless a different period is allowed by the court.
In any case, the grounds for the objections must be specified. (36a)
When repetition of objection unnecessary. (sec. 37 rule 132)
When it becomes reasonably apparent in the course of the examination of a witness
that the question being propounded are of the same class as those to which objection
has been made, whether such objection was sustained or overruled,
it shall not be necessary to repeat the objection, it being sufficient for the adverse party
to record his continuing objection to such class of questions. (37a)
Ruling. (sec. 38 rule 132)—
The ruling of the court must be given immediately after the objection is made,
unless the court desires to take a reasonable time to inform itself on the question
presented;
but the ruling shall always be made during the trial and
at such time as will give the party against whom it is made an opportunity to meet the
situation presented by the ruling.
The reason for sustaining or overruling an objection need not be stated. However, if the
objection is based on two or more grounds, a ruling sustaining the objection on one or
some of them must specify the ground or grounds relied upon. (38a)
Striking out answer. (sec. 39 rule 132)—
Should a witness answer the question before the adverse party had the opportunity to
voice fully its objection to the same, and such objection is found to be meritorious,
the court shall sustain the objection and order the answer given to be stricken off the
record.
On proper motion, the court may also order the striking out of answers which are
incompetent, irrelevant, or otherwise improper. (n)
Tender of excluded evidence. (sec. 40 rule 132)—
If documents or things offered in evidence are excluded by the court,
the offeror may have the same attached to or made part of the record.
If the evidence excluded is oral, the offeror may state for the record the name and other
personal circumstances of the witness and the substance of the proposed testimony.
(n)
RULE 133 Weight and Sufficiency of Evidence
Preponderance of evidence, how determined.(sec. 1 rule 133) —
In civil cases, the party having burden of proof must establish his case by a
preponderance of evidence.
In determining where the preponderance or superior weight of evidence on the issues
involved lies, the court may consider all the facts and circumstances of the case,
the witnesses' manner of testifying, their intelligence,
their means and opportunity of knowing the facts to which they are testifying,
the nature of the facts to which they testify,
the probability or improbability of their testimony,
their interest or want of interest, and also their personal credibility so far as the same
may legitimately appear upon the trial.
The court may also consider the number of witnesses, though the preponderance is not
necessarily with the greater number. (1a)
Proof beyond reasonable doubt. (sec. 2 rule 133)—
In a criminal case, the accused is entitled to an acquittal,
unless his guilt is shown beyond reasonable doubt.
Proof beyond reasonable doubt does not mean such a degree of proof, excluding
possibility of error, produces absolute certainly. Moral certainty only is required, or that
degree of proof which produces conviction in an unprejudiced mind. (2a)
Extrajudicial confession, not sufficient ground for conviction. (sec. 3 rule 133)—
An extrajudicial confession made by an accused, shall not be sufficient ground for
conviction, unless corroborated by evidence of corpus delicti. (3)
Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient. (sec. 4 rule 133)—
Circumstantial evidence is sufficient for conviction if:
(a)There is more than one circumstances;
(b)The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
(c)The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt. (5)
Substantial evidence.(sec. 5 rule 133) —
In cases filed before administrative or quasijudicial bodies,
a fact may be deemed established if it is supported by substantial evidence, or
that amount of relevant evidence which a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to
justify a conclusion. (n)
y
Power of the court to stop further evidence.(sec. 6 rule 133) —
The court may stop the introduction of further testimony upon any particular point
when the evidence upon it is already so full that more witnesses to the same point
cannot be reasonably expected to be additionally persuasive. But this power should be
exercised with caution. (6)
Evidence on motion. (sec. 7 rule 133)—
When a motion is based on facts not appearing of record
the court may hear the matter on affidavits or depositions presented by the respective
parties,
but the court may direct that the matter be heard wholly or partly on oral testimony or
depositions. (7)
RULE 134
[NOTE: This rule will be transposed to Part 1 of the Rules of Court on Deposition and
Discovery]
Perpetuation of Testimony
SECTION 1.Petition. — A person who desires to perpetuate his own testimony or that of
another person regarding any matter that may be cognizable in any court of the
Philippines, any file a verified petition in the court of the province of the residence of
any expected adverse party.
Sec. 2.Contents of petition. — The petition shall be entitled in the name of the petitioner
and shall show: (a) that the petitioner expects to be a party to an action in a court of the
Philippines by is presently unable to bring it or cause it to be brought; (b) the subject
matter of the expected action and his interest therein; (c) the facts which he desires to
establish by the proposed testimony and his reasons for desiring to perpetuate it; (d)
the names of a description of the persons he expects will be adverse parties and their
addresses so far as known; and (e) the names and addresses of the persons to be
examined and the substance of the testimony which he expects to elicit from each, and
shall ask for an order authorizing the petitioner to take the depositions of the persons to
be examined named in the petition for the purpose of perpetuating their testimony.
Sec. 3.Notice and service. — The petitioner shall thereafter serve a notice upon each
person named in the petition as an expected adverse party, together with a copy of a
petition, stating that the petitioner will apply to the court, at a time and place named
therein, for the order described in the petition. At least twenty (20) days before the date
of hearing the notice shall be served in the manner provided for service of summons.
Sec. 4.Order of examination. — If the court is satisfied that the perpetuation of the
testimony may prevent a failure or delay of justice, it shall make an order designating or
describing the persons whose deposition may be taken and specifying the subject
matter of the examination, and whether the depositions shall be taken upon oral
examination or written interrogatories. The depositions may then be taken in
accordance with Rule 24 before the hearing.
Sec. 5.Reference to court. — For the purpose of applying Rule 24 to depositions for
perpetuating testimony, each reference therein to the court in which the action is
pending shall be deemed to refer to the court in which the petition for such deposition
was filed.
Sec. 6.Use of deposition. — If a deposition to perpetuate testimony is taken under this
rule, or if, although not so taken, it would be admissible in evidence, it may be used in
any action involving the same subject matter subsequently brought in accordance with
the provisions of Sections 4 and 5 of Rule 24.
Sec. 7.Depositions pending appeal. — If an appeal has been taken from a judgment of
the Regional Trial Court or before the taking of an appeal if the time therefor has not
expired, the Regional Trial Court in which the judgment was rendered may allow the
taking of depositions of witnesses to perpetuate their testimony for use in the event of
further proceedings in the said court. In such case the party who desires to perpetuate
the testimony may make a motion in the said Regional Trial Court for leave to take the
depositions, upon the same notice and service thereof as if the action was pending
therein. The motion shall show (a) the name and the addresses of the persons to be
examined and the substance of the testimony which he expects to elicit from each; and
(b) the reason for perpetuating their testimony. If the court finds that the perpetuation of
the testimony is proper to avoid a failure or delay of justice, it may make an order
allowing the depositions to be taken, and thereupon the depositions may be taken and
used in the same manner and under the same conditions as are prescribed in these
rules for depositions taken in actions pending in the Regional Trial Court. (7a)
Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Watermark theme. Powered by Blogger.
Higit Pa escobalvictoria@gmail.com Dashboard Magsign Out
QUANTUM JURIS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 1- EVIDENCE Home
CIVIL PROCEDURE
EVIDENCE Page 1 EVIDENCE
Page 2 EVIDENCE
TWO PRINCIPAL PROBLEMS IN EVIDENCE: Page 3 EVIDENCE
1. How to determine which evidence is admissible; and
Page 4 EVIDENCE
2. Having determined that the evidence is admissible, how to present that evidence in a
manner that would make the court admit it once it is offered. RULES ON EVIDENCE
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS
SOURCES: RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
Rules of Court, Rule 128133
CivPro by Dean Inigo
Constitution
Special Laws (e.g.AntiWiretapping Act) Rules of Civil Proc (enumerations)
Revised Penal Code, Civil Code, etc. 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(15)
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(622)
Rule 128 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(2329 Depositions)
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(3039)
GENERAL PROVISIONS
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(4143 APPEALS)
Section 1. Concept of Evidence 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(4456)
EVIDENCE is the means, sanctioned by the Rules of Court, of ascertaining in a judicial 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(5761 Prov
Remedies)
proceeding the truth respecting a matter of fact
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(6271 Spl Civil
Action)
Every evidential question involves the relationship between the factum probans and
the factum probandum.
Blog Archive
FACTUM PROBANDUM the ultimate fact sought to be established.
It may be ascertained in: ▼ 2013 (1)
1. pleadings submitted by the parties ▼ January (1)
2. pretrial order INTRODUCTION
3. issues which are tried with the express or implied consent of the parties. (Sec. 5, Rule
10)
NOTE: If fact is admitted, there is no more factum probandum because there is no fact in LINKS
issue. SUPREME COURT
LawPhilArellano
FACTUM PROBANS the material evidencing the proposition. It is the fact by which the
factum probandum is established. Chan Robles Virtual Libray
Admissibility or inadmissibility of evidence is determined in accordance with the law in force at
the time the evidence is presented. Therefore, there is no vested right of evidence. Evidence
otherwise inadmissible under the law at the time the action accrued, may be received in
evidence provided that it is admissible under the law in force during the trial.
CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE:
A. Depending on its ability to establish the fact in dispute, an evidence may be:
1. Direct evidence—evidence which proves the fact in dispute without the aid of any
inference or presumption.
2. Circumstantial evidence— evidence of relevant collateral facts.
B. Depending on the degree of its value in establishing a disputed fact, an evidence may be:
1. Prima Facie Evidence—evidence which suffices for the proof of a particular fact until
contradicted and overcome by other evidence.
2. Cumulative evidence—evidence which is of the same kind and character as that already
given and tends to prove the same proposition.
3. Corroborative evidence—evidence which is of a different kind and character as that
already given and tends to prove the same proposition.
4. Conclusive evidence—evidence which is incontrovertible or one which the law does not
allow it to be contradicted.
C. Depending on its weight and acceptability, an evidence may be:
1. Primary or best evidence—evidence which affords the greatest certainty of the fact in
question.
2. Secondary evidence—evidence which is inferior to the primary evidence.
D. Depending on its nature, an evidence may be:
1. Object evidence — evidence addressed to the senses of the court and is capable of being
exhibited to examined or viewed by the court. Also known as autoptic proference.
2. Documentary evidence —evidence which consists of writings, words, numbers, figures,
symbols or other modes of written expressions offered as proof of their contents.
3. Testimonial evidence — evidence which consists of the narration or deposition by one
who has observed or has personal knowledge of that to which he is testifying.
E. Depending on its quality, an evidence may be:
Relevant evidence—if it has a relation to the fact in issue as to induce belief in its existence or
nonexistence.
Admissible evidence—if it is relevant to the issue and is not excluded by law or the Rules of
Court. This is also known as Competent evidence.
Credible evidence—if it is not only admissible evidence but also believable and used by the
court in deciding a case.
Section 2. Scope
GENERAL RULE: The rules of evidence are applicable to both civil and criminal cases
because the law does not distinguish. EXCEPTION: When the law specifically provides
otherwise.
INSTANCES WHERE RULES OF EVIDENCE DO NOT APPLY TO JUDICIAL
PROCEEDINGS:
1. Rules on Summary Procedure in civil actions;
2. Rules of Summary Procedure in criminal cases, where the witnesses submit their affidavits
and counteraffidavits, subject only to crossexamination;
3. Agrarian cases; and
4. Rules regarding the testimony of witnesses from examinations, etc., in cases under the
MTC (where the parties merely submit their position papers and their witnesses’ affidavits
and counteraffidavits.
Section 3. Admissibility of Evidence
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF EVIDENCE:
The evidence must be—
1. Relevant — has a logical connection with the fact in issue.
2. Competent — not excluded by the law or the rules.
2 AXIOMS OF ADMISSIBILITY:
1. Axiom of Relevancy None but facts having rational probative value are admissible ; and
2. Axiom of Competency All facts having rational probative value are admissible unless
some specific rule forbids their admission.
KINDS OF ADMISSIBILITY:
MULTIPLE — evidence will be received if it satisfies all the requirements prescribed by law in
order that it may be admissible for the purpose for which it is presented, even if it does not
satisfy the other requisites for its admissibility for other purposes.
CONDITIONAL — A fact offered in evidence may appear to be immaterial unless it is
connected with other facts to be subsequently proved. In such case, evidence of that fact may
be received on condition that the other facts be afterwards proved; otherwise, such fact
already received will be stricken out.
CURATIVE — an incompetent evidence is offered and admitted by the court over the objection
of the adverse party; in such case, the adverse party is likewise entitled to introduce a similar
improper evidence to counteract that already given.
2 CONSIDERATIONS:
1. Whether the incompetent evidence is seasonably objected to.
2. Whether regardless of the objections, the admission of such evidence will cause a plain
and unfair prejudice to the party against whom it was admitted.
RULE 129
WHAT NEED NOT BE PROVED
The following facts need not be proved:
1.Those which the courts may take judicial notice (Rule 129);
2.Those which are judicially admitted (Rule 129);
3. Those which are presumed (Rule 131).
Section 1. Judicial Notice
Cognizance of certain facts which judges may properly take and act without proof. They are
based on considerations of expediency and convenience.
it may be mandatory or discretionary.
MANDATORY when the facts pertain to:
1. the existence and territorial extent of states;
2. their political history, form of government, and symbols of nationality;
3. the law of nations;
4. the admiralty and maritime courts of the world and their seals;
5. the political constitution and history of the Philippines;
6. the official acts of the legislative, executive and judicial departments of the Philippines;
7. the laws of nature;
8. the measure of time; and
9. the geographical divisions
THE LAW OF NATIONS The law of nations which is the subject of judicial notice is the law
which regulates the relations of the dominant powers of the earth. It is not a foreign municipal
law which our courts are not authorized to take judicial notice of but the compilation of
rules which by common consent of mankind have been acquiesced in as law.
The mere personal knowledge of the judge is not the judicial knowledge of the court; judicial
cognizance is taken only of those matters which are “commonly” known. .A fact maybe of
judicial notice and not of judge’s personal knowledge and vice versa the rule refers to facts
which ought to be known to judges because of their judicial functions.
Section 2. Judicial notice, when discretionary.
Discretionary with respect to matters which are:
1. of public knowledge; or
2. capable of unquestionable demonstration; or
3. those that judges ought to know by reason of their judicial functions.
WHEN JUDGE MAY TAKE JUDICIAL NOTICE OF RECORDS OF ANOTHER CASE
PREVIOUSLY TRIED:
1. When, either at the initiative of the judge or that of the parties, and without objection of
any party, the record of the previous action are read and adopted into the present action.
2. When, without objection on the part of any party, the records of the previous case are
actually withdrawn from the archives and attached to the records of the present action, by
court order.
Judicial Notice of Municipal Ordinances
Inferior courts should take judicial notice of municipal city ordinances in force in their territorial
jurisdiction.
The RTC should take judicial notice of municipal ordinance only when:
1. they are expressly authorized by statute;
2. on appeals of decisions by the inferior court when such courts had taken notice of a
municipal ordinance.
DOCTRINE OF PROCESSUAL PRESUMPTION:
It is that doctrine which lays down the presumption that the foreign law is the same as the law of
the forum. It arises if the foreign law, though properly applicable, is either not alleged, or if
alleged, is not duly proved before a competent court.
NOTE: When parties in a case agree on what the foreign law provides, these are admissions of
fact which the other parties and the court are made to rely and act upon, hence they are in
estoppel to subsequently take a contrary position (Phil. Commercial & Industrial Bank, vs.
Escolin. et al)
Section 4. Judicial Admission
JUDICIAL ADMISSIONthe admission made in the course of the proceedings in the same case
by a party.
NOTE: Lack of jurisdiction cannot be admitted because jurisdiction is conferred by law and not
by stipulation of parties.
Judicial Admissions May Be Made in:
1. the pleadings filed by the parties;
2. in the course of the trial either by verbal or written manifestations or stipulations; or
3. in other stages of the judicial proceeding, as in the pretrial of the case;
4. admissions obtained through depositions, written interrogatories or requests for admissions.
Judicial admissions may be contradicted only when it is shown that:
1. it was made through palpable mistake; or
2. that no such admission was made.
Judicial admissions in pleadings later amended
In civil cases, an amended pleading becomes a judicial admission and the contents of the
pleading it amends not included in the amended pleading becomes extrajudicial admissions
which must be offered in evidence for it to be considered by the trial court.
Judicial admissions are always conclusive upon the admitter and does not require formal offer
as evidence, unlike in the case of extrajudicial admissions.
Admissions in affirmative defenses are merely hypothetical.
Judicial admissions made in one case are admissible at the trial of another case provided they
are proved and are pertinent to the issue involved in the latter, UNLESS:
1. the said admissions were made only for purposes of the first case, as in the rule of implied
admissions and their effects under Rule 26;
2. the same were withdrawn with the permission of the court therein; or
3. the court deems it proper to relieve the party therefrom.
IS SELFSERVING RULE APPLICABLE TO JUDICIAL ADMISSIONS? No. The selfserving
rule which prohibits the admission of declaration of a witness in his favor applies only to extra
judicial admissions. If the declaration is made in open court such is raw evidence, it is not self
serving. It is admissible because the witness may be crossexamined on that matter. However,
whether it will be credible or not, is a matter of appreciation on the part of the court.
RULE 130
RULES OF ADMISSIBILITY
OBJECT EVIDENCE
Always accompanied by testimonial evidence to support the object presented.
Not a rule of exclusion thus other kinds of evidence may be presented even if there is an object
evidence.
Requisites of object evidence to be admissible:
1. the object must be relevant to the fact in issue; and
2. the object must be authenticated before it is admitted.
OCULAR INSPECTION OR “VIEW”—the court can go to the place where the object is located,
when object evidence cannot be brought to court.
VIEW PART OF THE TRIAL—The inspection or view outside the courtroom should be made in
the presence of the parties or at least with previous notice to them in order that they may show the
object to be viewed. Such inspection is a part of the trial, inasmuch as evidence is thereby being
received. The parties are entitled to be present any stage of the trial, and consequently they are
entitled to be at least notified of the time and place set for the view.
DEMONSTRATIVE
REAL EVIDENCE EVIDENCE
Tangible object that Tangible evidence that
played some actual merely illustrate a
role in the matter that matter of importance in
gave rise to the the litigation.
litigation.
GROUNDS FOR EXCLUDING OBJECT EVIDENCE:
1. Inherent Limitations:
a) irrelevancy / immateriality
b) illegally obtained evidence
2. Noninherent Limitations:
a) Undue prejudice
b) Indecency or impropriety
c) Offensiveness to sensibilities
d) Inconvenience and unnecessary expense of litigation.
B. DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE
BEST EVIDENCE RULE
Best Evidence Rule is a rule of exclusion thus, subject to the exceptions under Rule 130, Sec.
3, it is mandatory that the original copy be presented in court.
NOTE: Where the transactions have been recorded in writing but the contents of such writing
are not “the subject of inquiry,” the best evidence rule does not apply. The best evidence rule is
not involved if the contents of affidavits or depositions are not the issues in the case but are only
intended as evidence to establish the issue in controversy. The use of said affidavits is regulated
by the hearsay evidence rule.
Section 3. Original document must be produced; exceptions.
PURPOSES:
1. TO PREVENT FRAUD If a party is in possession of such evidence and withholds it, and
seeks to substitute inferior evidence in its place, the presumption naturally arises that the
better evidence is withheld for fraudulent purposes which its production would expose and
defeat.
2. TO EXCLUDE UNCERTAINTIES IN THE CONTENTS OF A DOCUMENT—The best
evidence rule accepts the document itself as the best evidence of its contents, because it is
certain; and rejects a copy thereof, because of the uncertainty of its contents caused by the
hazards of faulty duplication, or an oral description thereof, because of the uncertainty
caused by the frailties of human recollection.
THREE (3) CONCEPTS OF “ORIGINAL” UNDER THE BEST EVIDENCE RULE (Sec. 4)
1. One the contents of which is the subject of inquiry;
2. When a document is in two or more copies executed at or about same time with identical
contents, all such copies are equally regarded as originals;
3. When an entry is repeated in the regular course of business, one being copied from
another at or near the time of the transaction.
SECONDARY EVIDENCE
Section 5. When original document is unavailable.
In case of loss or destruction of the original document, and AFTER PROVING EXECUTION or
EXISTENCE, CAUSE OF ITS UNAVAILABILITY without bad faith on the part of the offeror, and
REASONABLE EFFORT: in search for or attempt to produce the original document, the
following are admissible in the order stated:
1. a copy;
2. a recital of the contents in some authentic document; or
3. the testimony of witnesses.
The order does not apply where the law specifically provides for the class or quantum of
secondary evidence to establish the contents of the document. (DEFINITE EVIDENTIARY
RULE).
Original document is indispensable in crimes of falsification because the court requires the
presentation of the corpus delicti to prove the guilt of the accused. (US vs. GREGORIO)
PAROL EVIDENCE RULE
Section 9. Evidence of written agreements.
PURPOSE OF THE RULE:
To give stability to written agreement and remove the temptation and possibility of perjury, which
would be afforded if parol evidence was admissible.
REQUISITES FOR APPLICABILITY OF PAROL EVIDENCE RULE:
1. There must be a valid contract;
2. The terms of the agreement must be reduced to writing;
3. The dispute is between parties and their successors in interest; and
4. There is dispute as to the terms of the agreement.
Rule applies only to INTEGRATED AGREEMENTS, thus, unless the written instrument was
intended by both parties as the final and exclusive memorial of their dealings, the rule does not
apply.
THEORY OF INTEGRATION OF JURAL ACTS—Under this theory, previous acts and
contemporaneous transactions of the parties are deemed integrated and merged in the written
instrument which they have executed. When the parties have reduced their agreement to
writing, it is presumed that they have made the writing the ONLY REPOSITORY and
MEMORIAL OF THE TRUTH, and whatever is not found in the writing must be understood to
have been waived and abandoned.
EXCEPTION:
COLLATERAL ORAL AGREEMENT A contract made prior to or contemporaneous with
another agreement and IF ORAL and NOT INCONSISTENT with written contract IS
ADMISSIBLE within the exception to parol evidence rule.
An Agreement is “COLLATERAL” if it meets the following requirements:
1. it is not a part of the integrated written agreement in any way;
2. it is not inconsistent with the written agreement in any way, including both the express and
implied provisions of the written agreement; and
3. it is not closely connected with the principal transaction as to form part and parcel thereof.
The Parol Evidence Rule does not apply when COLLATERAL ORAL AGREEMENT refers to
SEPARATE and DISTINCT SUBJECTS.
REASON: The parties to a contract cannot be presumed to have embodied in a single writing
all the agreements which they had on different subjects.
Intrinsic or Latent Ambiguity—when the writing on its face appears clear and unambiguous
but there are collateral matters or circumstances which make the meaning uncertain.
Extrinsic or Patent Ambiguity—ambiguity is apparent on the face of the writing itself and
requires something to be added in order to ascertain the meaning of the words used.
*parol evidence cannot be used to ratify or supplement a void contract
Intermediate Ambiguity—Where the ambiguity consists in the use of equivocal words
designating the person or subject matter, parol evidence of collateral or extrinsic matter may be
introduced for the purpose of aiding the court in arriving at the meaning of the language used.
INTRINSIC and INTERMEDIATE AMBIGUITIES are curable by evidence aliunde or extraneous
evidence. PATENT AMBIGUITY cannot be cured by evidence aliunde.
Under the Parol Evidence Rule, the evidence aliunde is either testimonial evidence or
documentary evidence.
Principle of “Falsa Demonstratio non nocet cum de corpore constat”
False description does not injure or vitiate a document, provided that the thing or person
intended has once been sufficiently described.
Elements of MISTAKE as a ground for REFORMATION OF INSTRUMENT:
1. the mistake should be of fact;
2. the mistake should be mutual or common to both parties to the instrument; and
3. the mistake should be alleged and proved by clear and convincing evidence.
RULE ON CONDITIONAL AGREEMENTS:
1. Rule on Conditions Precedent—Parol Evidence Allowed because there is no varying of
the terms of the written contract by extrinsic agreement for the reason that there is no
contract in existence; there is nothing to which to apply the excluding rule.
2. Rule on Conditions Subsequent—Parol Evidence Not Allowed.
RULE ON SUBSEQUENT AGREEMENTS
Parol Evidence Allowed.The rule forbidding the admission of parol evidence to alter or contradict
a written instrument does not apply so as to prohibit the establishment by parol evidence of an
agreement between the parties in writing, entered into subsequent to the time when the written
instrument was executed, notwithstanding such agreement may have the effect of changing the
contract of the parties as evidenced by the writing; for parol evidence merely goes to show that
the parties have exercised their right to change the same, or to make a new and independent
contract, provided such contract is not invalid under the statute of frauds or otherwise.
Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Watermark theme. Powered by Blogger.
Higit Pa escobalvictoria@gmail.com Dashboard Magsign Out
QUANTUM JURIS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 2 - EVIDENCE Home
CIVIL PROCEDURE
Page 1 EVIDENCE
Page 2 EVIDENCE
Page 3 EVIDENCE
PAROL EVIDENCE BEST EVIDENCE RULE
RULE Page 4 EVIDENCE
Presupposes that the Contemplates a RULES ON EVIDENCE
original is available in situation when the
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS
court; original is not available
in court and/or there is RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
a dispute as to whether CivPro by Dean Inigo
said writing is the Rules of Civil Proc (enumerations)
original.
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(15)
Prohibits the varying of Prohibits the
the terms of a written introduction of 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(622)
agreement; substitutionary 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(2329 Depositions)
evidence in lieu of the
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(3039)
original document
regardless of whether 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(4143 APPEALS)
or not it varies the 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(4456)
contents of the
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(5761 Prov
original; Remedies)
Can be invoked only Can be invoked by any
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(6271 Spl Civil
when the controversy party to an action Action)
is between the parties regardless of whether
to the written such party participated
agreement, their or not in the writing Blog Archive
privies, or any party involve.
directly affected ▼ 2013 (1)
thereby. ▼ January (1)
With the exception of Applies to all kinds of INTRODUCTION
wills, the PER applies writing.
only to documents
which are contractual
in nature. LINKS
SUPREME COURT
LawPhilArellano
ANTIWIRETAPPING ACT (RA 4200)
Chan Robles Virtual Libray
Unlawful Acts:
A. Any person, who, without authority from all the parties to the private communication or
spoken word does any of the following:(Sec.1, par. 1)
1. to tap any wire or
2. to secretly overhear or intercept such communication or spoken word by using any
other device or arrangement;
3. to record such private communication or spoken word by using a device commonly
known as dictaphone, or dictagraph or detectaphone or walkietalkie or tape recorder or
however otherwise described.
B. Any person, whether participant or not in the above penalized acts, who, (Sec 1, par. 2)
1. knowingly possesses any tape record, wire record, disk record or any other such record
or copies thereof, of any communication or spoken word secured either before or after
the effective date of this Act on the manner prohibited by law; or
to replay the same for any other person or persons; or
2. to communicate the contents thereof, either verbally or in writing; or
to furnish transcriptions thereof, whether complete or partial, to any other person.
C. Any person who shall aid, permit, or cause to be done any of the acts declared to be
unlawful: (Sec.2)
D. Any person who shall violate the provisions of Section b of the exempted acts below or of
an order issued thereunder, or aids, permits or causes such violations (Sec.2)
Exempted Acts:
A. Use of such record or any copies thereof as evidence in any civil, criminal investigation or
trial of offenses mentioned below; (Sec.1, par.2)
B. Any peace officer, who is authorized by the written order of the court, to execute any of the
acts declared to be unlawful in cases involving the crimes of (Sec.3, par.1)
1. treason;
2. espionage;
3. provoking war and disloyalty in case of war;
4. piracy;
5. mutiny in the high seas;
6. rebellion;
7. conspiracy and proposal to commit rebellion;
8. inciting to rebellion;
9. sedition;
10. conspiracy to commit sedition;
11. inciting to sedition;
12. kidnapping as defined by the RPC;
13. violations of CA 616 punishing espionage and other offenses against national security.
Admissibility:
Any communication or spoken word, or the existence contents, substance, purport, effect, or
meaning of the same or any part thereof, or any information therein contained, obtained or
secured by any person in violation of this Act shall not be admissible in evidence in any judicial,
quasijudicial, or administrative hearing or investigation.
C. TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE
QUALIFICATION OF WITNESSES
Section 20. Witnesses; their qualifications.
WHO MAY BE WITNESSES—Except as otherwise provided in the rules, all persons who can
perceive, and perceiving, and can make known their perception to others, may be witnesses.
Unless otherwise provided by law, the following shall NOT be a ground for disqualification:
1. Religious or political belief;
2. Interest in the outcome of the case; or
3. Conviction of a crime.
THE FF CANNOT BE WITNESSES:
Those persons who, under the law, labor under:
1. Disqualification by reason of mental incapacity or immaturity;
2. Disqualification by reason of marriage;
3. Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of adverse party;
4. Disqualification on ground of privileged communication.
TEST OF COMPETENCY
Whether the individual has sufficient understanding to appreciate the nature and
obligation of an oath and sufficient capacity to observe and describe the facts in regard
to which he is called to testify.
Competency of a witness is presumed. The objection to the competency may be raised
at any time during the examination or crossexamination; but it should be made as soon
as the facts tending to show incompetency are discovered.
VOIR DIRE EXAMINATION—a preliminary examination conducted by the trial judge where
the witness is duly sworn to answer as to his competency.
THE RULE ON EXAMINATION OF A CHILD WITNESS (A.M. No. 00407SC): Effectivity:
December 15, 2000
Unless otherwise provided, this Rule shall govern the examination of child witnesses
who are victims of crime, accused of a crime, and witnesses to crime. It shall apply in all
criminal proceedings and noncriminal proceedings involving child witnesses (Sec. 1)
COMPETENCY under this rule every child is presumed qualified to be a witness.
However, the court shall conduct a competency examination of a child, motu proprio or
on motion of a party, when it finds that substantial doubt exists regarding the ability of
the child to perceive, remember, communicate, distinguish truth from falsehood, or
appreciate the duty to tell the truth in court (Sec. 6).
ÙExamination of a child as to his competence shall be conducted only by the judge.
Counsel for the parties, however, can submit questions to the judge that he may, in his
discretion, ask the child (Sec.6(d))
Definitions:
CHILD WITNESS—is any person who at the time of giving testimony is below eighteen
(18) years. In child abuse cases a child includes one over eighteen (18) years but is
found by the court as unable to fully take care of himself or protect himself from abuse,
neglect, cruelty, exploitation, or discrimination because of a physical or mental disability
or condition (Sec. 4 (a)).
CHILD ABUSE—means physical, psychological, or sexual abuse, and criminal neglect as
defined in Republic Act No.7610 and other related laws (Sec.4(b)).
FACILITATOR—means a person appointed by the court to pose questions to a child (Sec.
4 (c)). The facilitator may be a child psychologist, psychiatrist, social worker, guidance
counselor, teacher, religious leader, parent or relative.
SUPPORT PERSON—is a person chosen by the child to accompany him to testify at or
attend a judicial proceeding or deposition to provide emotional support for him (Sec.
4(f)).
BEST INTERESTS OF THE CHILD
The totality of the circumstances and conditions as are most congenial to the survival,
protection and feelings of security of the child and most encouraging to his physical,
psychological and emotional development. It also means the least detrimental available
alternative for safeguarding the growth and development of the child.
The public may be excluded from the courtroom when they do not have a direct interest
in the case. Such an order may be made to protect the right to privacy of the child or if
the court determines on the record that requiring the child to testify in open court would
cause psychological harm to him, hinder the ascertainment of truth, or result in his
inability to effectively communicate due to embarrassment, fear, or timidity. The court
may also, on motion of the accused, exclude the public from trial, except court personnel
and the counsel of the parties.
SPECIAL FEATURES:
1. livelink television testimony in criminal cases where the child is a victim or a witness
2. screens, one way mirrors, and other devices may be used to shield the child from the
accused
3. depositions of the child may be videotaped
4. the court may admit videotaped and audiotaped indepth investigative or diclosure
interviews in child abuse case.
EXAMPLE OF LAW BARRING A PERSON FROM TESTIFYING:
Art. 821 of the Civil Code:The following are disqualified from being witnesses to a will:
1. Any person not domiciled in the Philippines;
2. Those who have been convicted of falsification of a document, perjury or false
testimony.
Section 22. Disqualification by reason of marriage
REASON FOR THE RULE:
To obviate perjury and to prevent domestic disunity and unhappiness.
Disqualification by Disqualification by
REASON OF REASON OF MARITAL
MARRIAGE PRIVILEGE (Sec. 24(a) )
(Sec. 23)
Can be invoked only if Can be claimed
one of the spouses is a whether or not the
party to the action; other spouse is a party
to the action;
Applies only if the Can be claimed even
marriage is existing at after the marriage is
the time the testimony dissolved;
is offered;
Constitutes a total Applies only to
prohibition for or confidential
against the spouse of communications
the witness. between the spouses
The objection would be the married person is
raised on the ground of on the stand but the
marriage. The married objection of privilege is
witness would not be raised when
allowed to take the confidential marital
stand at all because of communication is
the disqualification. inquired into.
Even if the testimony
is, for or against the
objecting spouse, the
spousewitness cannot
testify.
Marrying the witness An accused can effectively “seal the lips” of a witness by
marrying the witness. As long as a valid marriage is in existence at the time of the trial,
the witnessspouse cannot be compelled to testify—even where the crime charged is
against the witness’ person, and even though the marriage was entered into for the
express purpose of suppressing the testimony.
WHO MAY OBJECT? Only the spouseparty and not the other spouse who is offered as a
witness.
Section 23. Disqualification by reason of death or insanity of adverse party.
The provision is otherwise known as DEAD MAN ‘S STATUTE.
Requisites:
1. The witness is a party or assignor of a party to a case or persons in whose behalf a
case is prosecuted.
2. That the action is against an executor or administrator or other representative of a
deceased person or a person of unsound mind;
3. That the subjectmatter of the action is a claim or demand against the estate of such
deceased person or against person of unsound mind;
4. That his testimony refers to any matter of fact which occurred before the death of
such deceased person or before such person became of unsound mind.
Meaning of “assignor”means assignor of a cause of action which has arisen and not the
assignor of a right before any cause of action accrued.
MARITAL
DEAD MAN’S
DISQUALIFICATION
STATUTE
RULE
Only a partial It is a complete and
disqualification as absolute disqualification;
the witness is not
completely
disqualified but is
only prohibited from
testifying on the
matters therein
specified;
Applies only to a civil Applies to a civil or
case or special criminal case, subject
proceeding over the only to the two
estate of a deceased exceptions provided
or insane person. therein: (1)except in a
civil case by one against
the other; or (2) in a
criminal case for a crime
committed by one against
the other or the latter’s
direct descendants or
ascendants).
PURPOSE OF THE RULE:
To guard against the temptation to give false testimony on the part of the surviving party,
and to put the parties to the suit upon the terms of equality in regard to opportunity to
produce evidence.
Facts favorable to the deceased are NOT prohibited:
Inasmuch as the statutes are designed to protect the interest of a deceased or insane
person, they do not exclude testimonies which are favorable to the representative of
such person (ICARD vs. MASIGAN)
The Dead Man’s Statute or the Survivorship Rule does not apply in the following cases:
1. Testimony of mere witnesses who are neither party plaintiffs, nor their assignors, nor
persons in whose behalf a case is prosecuted;
2. If the plaintiff is the executor or administrator or other representative of a deceased
person, or the person of unsound mind;
3. In an action against a partnership;
4. If the person or persons mentioned under
the rule files a counterclaim;
5. when the testimony refers to fraudulent transactions committed by the persons
mentioned in the rule (Ong Chua v. CARR);
6. when there is waiver;
7. when the testimony of a plaintiff refers to the nonoccurrence of a fact, because in
that case, the plaintiff does not testify on the occurrence of a fact but on its non
occurrence.
8. in cadastral cases.
Section 24. Disqualification by reason of privileged communication
WHO MAY ASSERT PRIVILEGE?
1. Holder of privilege;
2. Authorized persons; and
3. Persons to whom privileged communication were made
We apply the privileged communication to both civil and criminal cases EXCEPT as to the
doctorpatient privilege, which is applicable only in civil cases.
A. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN HUSBAND AND WIFE
Requisites:
1. there was a valid marital relation;
2. the privilege is invoked with respect to a communication between the spouses during
said marriage; and
3. the spouse against whom such evidence is being offered has not given his or her
consent to such testimony
There is a presumption of confidentiality on all communication between husband and
wife:
Communications overheard by third persons without knowledge of spouses is still
confidential but the third party is not disqualified to testify
Where there is collusion and voluntary disclosure to third party, the latter becomes an
agent and cannot testify.
Communication in furtherance of fraud and crime is not privileged.
B. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN ATTORNEY AND CLIENT
Requisites:
1. There is an attorney and client relationship;
2. The privilege is invoked with respect to a confidential communication between them in
the course of professional employment; and
3. The client has not given consent to the attorney’s testimony thereon; or if the
attorney’s secretary, stenographer or clerk is sought to be examined, that both the
client and the attorney have not given their consent thereto.
Preliminary communication made for the purpose of creating the attorneyclient
relationship are within the privilege. However, if the communications were not made for
the purpose of creating that relationship, they will not be covered by the privilege.
The disqualification based on the attorneyclient privilege does NOT apply to
communications which are:
1. intended to be made public;
2. intended to be communicated to others;
3. received from third persons not acting in behalf or as agents of the client;
4. intended for an unlawful purpose;
5. made in the presence of third parties who are strangers to the attorneyclient
relationship.
May a lawyer invoke the privilege and refuse to divulge the client’s name or identity?
General Rule: A lawyer may not invoke the privilege and refuse to divulge the name or
identity of his client.
Exceptions:
1. where a strong possibility exists that revealing client’s name would implicate the
client in the very activity for which he sought the lawyer’s advice;
2. where disclosure would open the client to civil liability; and
3. where the prosecutors have no case against the client unless by revealing the client’s
name, the said name would furnish only the link that would form the chain of
testimony necessary to convict an individual for a crime. (Regala v. Sandiganbayan)
C. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN DOCTOR AND PATIENT:
Requisites:
1. The physician is authorized to practice medicine, surgery or obstetrics;
2. The information was acquired or the advice or treatment was given by him in his
professional capacity for the purpose of treating or curing the patient;
3. The information, advice or treatment, if revealed, would blacken the reputation of the
patient; and
4. The privilege is invoked in a civil case, whether the patient is a party thereto or not.
When privilege does NOT apply:
1. Where the communication was not given in confidence
2. The communication is irrelevant to the professional employment
3. The communication was made for an unlawful purpose
4. The information was intended to be made public
5. There was a waiver of the privilege either by provisions of contract or law
D. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION BETWEEN PRIEST AND PENITENT:
Requisites:
1. The confession must have been made to the priest in his professional character in the
course of discipline enjoined by the church to which he belongs.
2. The communications were made in confidential and penitential in character.
E. PRIVILEGED COMMUNICATION TO PUBLIC OFFICERS:
Requisites:
1. The holder of the privilege is the government, acting through a public officer;
2. The communication was given to the public officer in confidence;
3. The communication was given during the term of office of the public officer or
afterwards;
4. The public interest would suffer by the disclosure of the communication.
F. OTHER PRIVILEDGED MATTERS
1. The guardian ad litem shall not testify in any proceeding concerning any information,
statement, or opinion received from the child in the course of serving as a guardian ad
litem, unless the court finds it necessary to promote the best interests of the child
(Sec. 5 (e) of the Rule on Examination of a Child Witness).
2. Editors may not be compelled to disclose the source of published news.
3. Voters may not be compelled to disclose for whom they voted.
4. Trade secrets.
5. Bank Deposits.
Section 25. Parental and filial privilege
Rule: No person may be compelled to testify against his parents, other direct
ascendants, children or other direct descendants.
Reason for the Rule: To preserve family cohesion.
NOTE: Article 215 of the Family Code provides:
No descendant shall be compelled, in a criminal case, to testify against his parents and
grandparents, EXCEPT when such testimony is indispensable in a crime against the
descendant or by one against the other.
Rule 130, Sec. 25 of the Rules of Court does not provide for an exception, whereas, Art.
215 of the Family Code does. Which should be applied in case of conflict? It was
suggested that the Rules of Court should apply because it took effect in 1989 as
compared to the Family Code which took effect in 1988. It may be argued that the former
is procedural and the latter is substantive; however, it was further suggested that
although the Family Code provision is substantive, it is procedural in character. So, of
these two provisions, the Rules of Court, which was made by the Supreme Court, should
prevail.
ADMISSIONS AND CONFESSIONS
Section 26. Admissions of a party.
ADMISSION – any statement of fact made by a party against his interest or unfavorable to
the conclusion for which he contends or is inconsistent with the facts alleged by him.
RULE ON ADMISSIONS—The act, declaration or omission of a party as to a relevant fact
may be given in evidence against him.
Therefore, if the act, declaration or omission is in his favor, it is NOT an admission.
SELFSERVING DECLARATION—one which has been made extrajudicially by the party to
favor his interest. It is not admissible in evidence because of the lack of opportunity to
crossexamine.
ADMISSION visavis CONFESSION—Every confession is an admission, but not all
admissions are confessions.
ADMISSION CONFESSION
statement of fact which statement of fact which
does not involve an involve an
acknowledgment of acknowledgment of
guilt or liability; guilt or liability;
may be made by third can be made only by
persons and in certain the party himself and,
cases, are admissible in some instances, are
against a party;
admissible against his
coaccused;
express or tacit always express
DECLARATIONS ADMISSIONS
AGAINST INTEREST
made against the need not be made
proprietary or against pecuniary or
pecuniary interest of proprietary interest;
the parties
made by a person who made by a party
is either deceased or himself, and is primary
unable to testify evidence and
competent though he
be present in court and
ready to testify;
must be made ante may be made any time.
litem motam
Section 27. Offer of compromise not admissible.
In CIVIL CASES, an offer of compromise is not an admission of any liability, and is not
admissible in evidence against the offeror. EXCEPT: When such offer is clearly not only
to buy peace but amounts to an admission of liability the offered compromise being
directed only to the amount paid (El Varadero de Manila VS. Insular Lumber).
REASON: It is the policy of the law to favor the settlement of disputes, to foster
compromises and to promote peace.
In CRIMINAL CASES, an offer of compromise by the accused may be received in
evidence as an implied admission of guilt.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. Those involving quasioffenses;
2. Under the Katarungang pambarangay law;
3. Plea of guilty later withdrawn;
4. An unaccepted offer of plea of guilty to a lesser offense;
5. An offer to pay or the payment of medical, hospital or other expenses occasioned
by an injury;
6. Tax cases.
An offer of compromise that may be considered an implied admission need not be made
by the accused himself, it may be made by his lawyer or relatives, provided it is made
with the consent of the accused or with his knowledge and he does not stop it.
EXCEPTION: compromise made by the tribes. (PEOPLE vs. MACATANA)
Distinguish OFFER OF COMPROMISE from ORDINARY ADMISSION:
In an offer of compromise, the proposal is tentative and any statement made in
connection with it is hypothetical—to buy peace and, in contemplation of mutual
concessions, whereas in an ORDINARY ADMISSION, the intention is apparently to admit
liability and to seek to buy or secure relief against a liability recognized as such.
PRINCIPLE OF RES INTER ALIOS ACTA
1ST PART: The rights of a party CANNOT be prejudiced by an act, declaration, or
omission of another, except as hereinafter provided (Sec. 28);
2nd PART: Similar acts as evidence (Sec. 34).
EXCEPTIONS TO PART ONE:
A. ADMISSIONS BY COPARTNER OR AGENT (Sec.29)
REQUISITES:
1. The act or declaration of a partner or agent of the party must be within the scope of
his authority;
2. During the existence of the partnership or agency; and
3. After the partnership or agency is shown by evidence other than such act or
declaration;
The same rule applies to the act or declaration of a joint owner, joint debtor, or other
person jointly interested with the party (Sec. 29).
B. ADMISSION BY CONSPIRATOR (Sec. 30):
It refers to an extrajudicial declaration of a conspirator not to his testimony by way of
direct evidence.
REQUISITES:
1. That the conspiracy be first proved by evidence other than the admission itself;
2. That the admission relates to the conspiracy itself; and
3. That it has been made while the declarant was engaged in carrying out the
conspiracy.
NOTE: These are not required in admissions during trial as the coaccused can cross
examine the declarant and besides the conspiracy has already ended.
C. ADMISSION BY PRIVIES
PRIVIES – those who have mutual or successive relationship to the same rights of
property or subject matter such as personal representatives, heirs, devisees, legatees,
assigns, voluntary grantees, or judgment creditors or purchasers from them with notice
to the facts
REQUISITES:
1. That there must be privity between the party and the declarant;
2. The declarant as predecessor in interest made the declaration while holding the title
to the property; and
3. The admission relates to the property.
D. ADMISSION BY SILENCE
REQUISITES:
1. He must have heard or observed the act or declaration of the other person;
2. He must have had the opportunity to deny it;
3. He must have understood the statement;
4. He must have an interest to object, such that he would naturally have done so, if the
statement was not true;
5. The facts were within his knowledge; and
6. The fact admitted or the inference to be drawn from his silence is material to the issue.
DOCTRINE OF ADOPTIVE ADMISSION
An adoptive admission is a party’s reaction to a statement or action by another person
when it is reasonable to treat the party’s reaction as an admission of something stated or
implied by the other person (ESTRADA vs. DESIERTO 356 SCRA 108).
Section 33. Confession
CONFESSION a categorical acknowledgment of guilt made by an accused in a criminal
case, without any exculpatory statement or explanation.
If the accused admits having committed the act in question but alleges a justification
therefore, the same is merely an admission.
There can also be a confession of judgment in a civil case where the party expressly
admits his liability.
JUDICIAL CONFESSION—is one made before a court in which the case is pending and in the
course of legal proceedings therein and, by itself, can sustain a conviction even in
capital offenses.
EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION—is one made in any other place or occasion and cannot
sustain a conviction unless its voluntariness is proven and unless corroborated by
evidence of the corpus delicti.
REQUIREMENTS FOR AN EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION TO BE ADMISSIBLE:
1. It must be express (Sec. 33, Rule 130 Rules of Court);
2. Voluntary (1987 Constitution)
3. With assistance of competent and independent counsel (1987 Constitution)
4. Must be in writing (R.A.7438);
GENERAL RULE: an EXTRAJUDICIAL CONFESSION is admissible against the confessor
only. It is incompetent evidence against his coaccused for being hearsay and because
of the res inter alios acta rule.
EXCEPTIONS: When admissible against the codefendants:
1. If the codefendants impliedly acquiesced in or adopted said confession;
2. If the accused persons voluntarily and independently executed identical
confession without collusion, and corroborated by other evidence—INTERLOCKING
CONFESSIONS
3. Where the accused admitted the facts stated by the confessant after being
apprised by such confession;
4. If they are charged as coconspirators of the crime which was confessed by one
of the accused and said confession is used only as corroborating evidence;
5. Where the confession is used as circumstantial evidence to show the probability
of participation by the coconspirator;
6. When the confessant testified for his codefendant;
7. Where the coconspirator’ extrajudicial confession is corroborated by other
evidence of record.
In line with the 1987 Constitution, illegal confessions and admissions are inadmissible
against the confessant or the admitter but are admissible against the persons who
violated the constitutional prohibition in obtaining such illegal confessions or
admissions.
Section 34. Similar acts as evidence
This is the second part of the res inter alios acta.
General Rule: Evidence that one did or did not do a certain thing at one time is not
admissible to prove that he did or did not do the same or similar thing at another time.
Exceptions—It may be received to prove:
1. specific intent or knowledge;
2. identity;
3. plan;
4. system;
5. scheme;
6. habit;
7. custom or usage; and
8. other of the like.
TESTIMONIAL KNOWLEDGE
Section 36. Testimony generally confined to personal knowledge; hearsay excluded.
GENERAL RULE: A witness can testify only to those facts which he knows of his
personal knowledge; that is, which are derived from his own perception, except as
otherwise provided in these rules.
REASON FOR EXCLUDING HEARSAY: not subject to the test of truth because there is no
opportunity for crossexamination. Also, this will be a violation of the constitutional right
to confrontation.
HEARSAY RULE
CLASSIFICATION OF OUTOFCOURT STATEMENTS:
1. HEARSAY Those which are considered as hearsay and therefore inadmissible,
this occurs when the purpose for introducing the ourofcourt statement is to prove
the truth of the facts asserted therein;
2. NONHEARSAY— Admissible. This occurs when the purpose for introducing the
statement is not to prove the truth of the facts asserted therein but only the making of
the statements and are admissible in evidence when the making of the statement is
relevant. These are socalled INDEPENDENTLY RELEVANT STATEMENTS.
3. EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE—Those which are hearsay but are
considered as exceptions to the hearsay rule and are therefore admissible. These are
from Sections 37 to 47 of Rule 130.
HEARSAY EVIDENCE:
They are admissible by reason of NECESSITY and TRUSTWORTHINESS.
Hearsay evidence not objected to may be admissible but, whether objected to or not, has
no probative value and as opposed to direct and primary evidence, the latter always
prevails.
EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE:
1. Dying Declaration;
2. Declaration Against Interest;
3. Act or declaration About pedigree;
4. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree;
5. Common reputation;
6. Res Gestae;
7. Entries in the ordinary course of business;
8. Entries in official records;
9. Commercial lists;
10. Learned treatises;
11. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding
Section 37. Dying declaration
REQUISITES:
1. That death is imminent and the declarant is conscious of that fact;
2. That the declaration refers to the cause and and surrounding circumstances of such
death;
3. That the declaration relates to the facts which the victim is competent to testify to;
and
4. That the declaration is offered in a case wherein the declarant’s death is subject of
the inquiry.
A dying declaration may be oral or written or made by signs which could be interpreted
and testified to by a witness thereto.
Dying Declarations favorable to the accused are admissible.
Dying declaration may also be regarded as part of the res gestae as they were made soon
after the startling occurrence without the opportunity for fabrication or concoction.
Dying declaration is not considered a confidential communication between spouses.
A dying declaration may be attacked on the ground that any of the requisites for its
admissibility are not present and the same may be impeached in the same manner as the
testimony of any other witness on the stand.
HEARSAY EXCEPTION IN CHILD ABUSE CASES:
A statement made by a child describing any act or attempted act of child abuse, not
otherwise admissible under the hearsay rule, may be admitted in evidence in any criminal
or noncriminal proceeding subject to the following rules:
(a) Before such hearsay statement maybe admitted, its proponent shall make known
to the adverse party the intention to offer such statement and its particulars to provide
him a fair opportunity to object.
If the child is available, the court shall, upon motion of the adverse party, require the
child to be present at the presentation of the hearsay statement for crossexamination by
the adverse party. When the child is unavailable, the fact of such circumstance must be
proved by the proponent.
(b) In ruling on the admissibility of such hearsay statement, the court shall consider the
time, content and circumstances thereof, based on various factors provided by the law,
which provide sufficient indicia of reliability (Sec. 28(a) and (b), The Rule on Examination
of a Child Witness).
Section 38. Declarations against interest.
REQUISITES:
1. That the declarant is dead or unable to testify;
2. That it relates to a fact against the interests of the declarant;
3. That at the time he made said declaration the declarant was aware that the same was
contrary to his aforesaid interest; and
4. That the declarant had no motive to falsify and he believed such declaration to be
true.
Section 39. Act or declaration about pedigree.
Section 40. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree.
Section 39 Section 40
Act or declaration Family reputation or
about PEDIGREE; tradition regarding
pedigree;
Witness need not be a Witness is a member of
member of the family; the family;
Testimony is about Testimony is about
what declarant, dead or family reputation or
unable to testify, has tradition covering
said concerning the matters of pedigree.
pedigree of the
declarant’s family.
Section 41: Common reputation
The following may be established by common reputation:
1. Matters of public interest more than 30 yrs. old;
2. matters of general interest more than 30 years old;
3. matters respecting marriage or moral character and related facts
4. individual moral character
COMMON REPUTATION—is the definite opinion of the community in which the fact to be
prove is known or exists. It means the general or substantially undivided reputation, as
distinguished from a partial or qualified one, although it need not be unanimous.
ÙAs a general rule, the reputation of person should be that existing in the place of his
residence, it may also be that existing in the place where he is best known.
EVIDENCE OF NEGATIVE GOOD REPUTE:
Where the foundation proof shows that the witness was in such position that he would
have heard reports derogatory to one’s character, the reputation testimony may be
predicated on the absence of reports of bad reputation or on the fact that the witness had
heard nothing against the person.
Section 42: Part of res gestae
RES GESTAE – literally means things done; it includes the circumstances, facts, and
declarations incidental to the main fact or transaction necessary to illustrate its character
and also includes acts, words or declaration which are closely connected therewith as to
constitute part of the transaction.
TWO TYPES OF RES GESTAE:
1. Statements made by a person while a startling occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior or subsequent thereto with respect to the circumstances thereof
(SPONTANEOUS STATEMENTS)
2. Statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue, and giving it a legal
significance (VERBAL ACTS).
REQUISITES OF ADMISSIBILITY OF SPONTANEOUS STATEMENTS:
1. there must be a startling occurrence
2. the statement must relate to the circumstances of the starling occurrence
3. the statement must be spontaneous
REQUISITES OF ADMISSIBILITY OF VERBAL ACTS:
1. the act or occurrence characterized must be equivocal
2. verbal acts must characterize or explain the equivocal act
3. equivocal act must be relevant to the issue
4. verbal acts must be contemporaneous with the equivocal act
DYING
RES GESTAE in DECLARATIONS
connection with a
homicidal act
Maybe made by the Can be made only by
killer himself after or the victim
during the killing or that
of a 3rd person
May precede, Made only after the
accompany or be made homicidal attack has
after the homicidal been committed
attack was committed
Justification in the Trustworthiness based
spontaneity of the upon its being given
statement an awareness of
impending death
SPONTANEOUS
VERBAL ACTS
STATEMENTS
the res gestae is the the res gestae is the
equivocal act startling occurrence
verbal act must be statements may be
contemporaneous with made prior, while or
or must accompany the immediately after the
equivocal act startling occurrence
Section 44. Entries in official records.
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF OFFICIAL ENTRIES:
1. that it was made by a public officer or by another person specially enjoined by law to
do so
2. that it was made by a public officer in the performance of his duty, or by another
person in the performance of a duty specially enjoined by law
3. the public officer or the other person had sufficient knowledge of the facts by him
stated, which must have been acquired by him personally or through official
information
Probative value: only prima facie evidence of the fact stated therein
OPINION RULE
Section 48. General rule
GENERAL RULE: Opinion of a witness is not admissible.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. On a matter requiring SPECIAL knowledge, skill, experience or training which he is
shown to possess (Sec. 49);
2. The identity of a person about whom he has adequate knowledge (Sec. 50[a]);
3. A handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity (Sec. 50 [b]);
4. The mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted (Sec. 50 [c]);
5. The witness’ impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a
person (Sec. 50 [d]);.
Expert evidence is admissible only if
a) the matter to be testified requires expertise and
b) the witness has been qualified as en expert.
Hypothetical questions may be asked of an expert to elicit his opinion. Courts, however,
are not necessarily bound by the expert’s findings.
CHARACTER EVIDENCE
Section 51. Character evidence generally not admissible; exceptions
GENERAL RULE: character evidence is not admissible in evidence under Sec.51 of Rule
130 of the Revised Rules on Evidence.
EXCEPTIONS:
CRIMINAL CASES:
1. accused may prove his good moral character which is pertinent to the moral trait
involved in the offense charge.
2. The prosecution may not prove bad moral character of the accused unless in rebuttal
when the latter opens the issue by introducing evidence of his Good moral character.
3. As to the offended party, his good or bad moral character may be proved as long as it
tends to establish the probability or improbability of the offense charged
EXCEPTIONS:
1. proof of the bad character of the victim in a murder case is not admissible if the
crime was committed through treachery and premeditation; and
2. in prosecution for rape, evidence of complainant’s past sexual conduct, opinion
thereof or of his/her reputation shall not be admitted unless, and only to the
extent that the court finds that such evidence is material and relevant to the case
(Rape Shield, RA 8505 Sec. 6).
CIVIL CASES
The moral character of either party thereto cannot be proved unless it is pertinent to the
issue of character involved in the case.
AS TO WITNESSES:
Both criminal and civil the bad moral character of a witness may always be proved by
either party (Sec. 11, Rule 132) but not evidence of his good moral character, unless it has
been impeached. (Sec. 14)
RULE 131
BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS:
Section 1. Burden of Proof
BURDEN OF PROOF/RISK OF NONPERSUASION—the duty of a party to present
evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his claim or defense by the amount
of evidence required by law.
UPON WHOM BURDEN OF PROOF RESTS:
A. Civil Cases
1. the plaintiff has the burden of proof to show the truth of his allegations if the defendant
raises a negative defense
2. the defendant has the burden of proof if he raises an affirmative defense on the
complaint of the plaintiff
B. Criminal Cases
The burden of proof is with the prosecution by reason of the presumption of innocence.
NOTE: Under the Speedy Trial Act, if the accused is NOT brought to trial within the time
required, the information shall be dismissed on the motion of the accused. In this case,
the BURDEN OF PROOF of supporting such motion is with the accused (Sec. 13, RA
8493).
DEGREE OF PROOF THAT SATISFIES THE BURDEN OF PROOF:
A. CIVIL CASES
Preponderance of evidence
B. CRIMINAL CASES
1. To sustain conviction
Evidence of guilt beyond reasonable doubt
2. Preliminary investigation
Engender a well founded belief of the fact of the commission of a crime.
3. Issuance of warrant of arrest
Probable cause, i.e. that there is reasonable ground to believe that the accused has
committed an offense.
HEIRARCHY OF EVIDENCE:
1. proof beyond reasonable doubt
2. clear and convincing evidence
3. preponderance of evidence
4. substantial evidence
BURDEN OF EVIDENCE—logical necessity on a party during a particular time of the trial
to create a prima facie case in his favor or to destroy that created against him by
presenting evidence.
In both civil and criminal cases, the burden of evidence lies on the party who asserts an
affirmative allegation.
BURDEN OF PROOF BURDEN OF EVIDENCE
Does not shift Shifts from party to
party depending upon
the exigencies of the
case in the course of
the trial;
Generally determined Generally determined
by the pleadings filed by the developments of
by the party the trial, or by the
provisions of
substantive law or
procedural rules which
may relieve the party
from presenting
evidence on the facts
alleged.
UPON WHOM BURDEN OF EVIDENCE RESTS:
A. CIVIL CASES:
The plaintiff has to prove his affirmative allegations in the complaint and the defendant
has to prove the affirmative allegations in his counterclaim and his affirmative defenses.
B. CRIMINAL CASES:
The PROSECUTION has to prove its affirmative allegations in the information regarding
the elements of the crime as well as the attendant circumstances; while the DEFENSE
has to prove its affirmative allegations regarding the existence of justifying or exempting
circumstances, absolutory causes or mitigating circumstances.
PRINCIPLE OF NEGATIVING AVERMENTS
Is a party required to prove negative allegations?
GENERAL RULE: NO. They need not be proved, whether in a civil or criminal action.
EXCEPTION: Where such negative allegations are essential parts of the cause of action
or defense in a civil case, or are essential ingredients of the offense in a criminal case or
defenses thereto.
HOWEVER, in civil cases, even if the negative allegation is an essential part of the cause
of action or defense, such negative allegation does not have to be proved if it is only for
the purpose of denying the existence of a document which should properly be in the
custody of the adverse party.
PRESUMPTIONS an inference of the existence or nonexistence of a fact which courts
are permitted to draw from the proof of other facts.
CLASSIFICATION OF PRESUMPTIONS:
1. PRESUMPTION IS JURIS OR OF LAW—deduction which the law expressly directs to
be made from particular facts.
2. PRESUMPTION IS HOMINIS OR OF FACT—deduction which reason draws from facts
proved without an express direction from the law to that effect.
PRESUMPTIONS OF PRESUMPTIONS OF
LAW FACT
Certain inference must A discretion is vested
be made whenever the in the tribunal as to
facts appear which drawing the inference
furnish the basis of the
inference
Reduced to fix rules Derived wholly and
and form a part of the directly from the
system of circumstances of the
jurisprudence particular case by
means of the common
experience of mankind
PRESUMPTION IS JURIS may be divided into:
1. CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTION (juris et de jure)—which is a presumption of law that is
not permitted to be overcome by any proof to the contrary; and
2. DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS (juris tantum)—is that which the law permits to be
overcome or contradicted by proofs to the contrary; otherwise, the same remains
satisfactory.
Presumptions are evidence according to the law, which considers and regulates them as
such. As they constitute evidence, presumptions are irrelevant and therefore
inadmissible when they do not correspond to the allegation and the facts at issue in the
pleadings.
CLASSES OF CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS under RULE 131:
1. ESTOPPEL IN PAIS (Rule 131, Sec. 2(par. a)—whenever a party has, by his own
declaration, act or omission, intentionally and deliberately led another to believe a
particular thing to be true and to act upon such belief, he cannot, in any litigation
arising out of such declaration, act or omission, be permitted to falsify it.
2 ESTOPPEL BY DEED (Rule 131, Sec. 2 (par. b)—the tenant is not permitted to deny the
title of his landlord at the time of the commencement of the relation of landlord and
tenant between them.
ÙDisputable presumption of regularity apply to both government and private
transactions
WHEN PRESUMPTION OF “EVIDENCE WILLFULY SUPPRESSED WOULD BE ADVERSE IF
PRODUCED” will not apply:
1. If the suppression is NOT willful;
2. If the evidence that is withheld is merely corroborative or cumulative;
3. If the evidence is at the disposal of or equally available to both parties;
4. If the suppression is an exercise of a privilege.
For the presumption that “A LETTER DULY DIRECTED AND MAILED WAS RECEIVED IN A
REGULAR COURSE OF THE MAIL” to arise, it must be proved that the letter was properly
addressed with postage prepared and that it was actually mailed.
RULE 132
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES
Section 1. Examination to be done in open court.
HOW ORAL EVIDENCE GIVEN—It is usually given orally, in open court. Therefore,
generally, the testimonies of witnesses cannot be presented in affidavits.
ÙOne instance when the testimonies of witnesses may be given in affidavits is under the
rule on summary procedure.
PURPOSE: to enable the court to judge the credibility of the witness by the witness’
manner of testifying, their intelligence and their appearance.
The form and nature of the questions that may and may not be propounded to a witness
are as follows:
iQuestions must not be indefinite or uncertain;
iQuestions must be relevant;
iQuestions must not be argumentative;
iQuestions must not call for conclusion of law;
iQuestions must not call for opinion or hearsay evidence;
iQuestions must not call for illegal answer;
iQuestions must not call for selfincriminating testimony;
iQuestions must not be leading;
iQuestions must not be misleading;
iQuestions must not tend to degrade reputation of witness;
iQuestions must not be repetitious.
Section 3: Rights and obligations of a witness.
RIGHTS OF A WITNESS:
1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions, and from harsh or
insulting demeanor;
2. Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice require;
3. Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue;
4. Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an offense unless
otherwise provided by law;
5. Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his reputation, unless it be to the very
fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact at issue would be presumed. But a
witness must answer to the fact of his previous final conviction for an offense.
The exception under no. 4 refers to immunity statutes wherein the witness is granted
immunity from criminal prosecution for offenses admitted in his testimony, e.g. under
Sec. 8, R.A. 1379, the law providing for the forfeiture of unlawfully acquired property; and
under P.D. 749, in prosecutions for bribery and graft.
CLASSIFICATION OF IMMUNITY STATUTES:
Use Immunity prohibits use of witness’ compelled testimony and its fruit in any manner
in connection with the criminal prosecution of the witness. It does not render a witness
immune from prosecution despite invocation of right against self incrimination
Transactional Immunity grants immunity to the witness from prosecution for an offense
to which his compelled testimony relates.
NOTE: For purposes of evidence, Right against self incrimination refers only to
testimonial compulsion.
Right against selfincrimination is granted only in favor of individuals, hence, a
corporation cannot invoke that privilege as the question testimony can come only from a
corporate officer or employee who has a personality distinct from that of the corporation.
Right against selfincrimination extends to administrative proceedings with a criminal or
penal aspect.
WITNESS PROTECTION, SECURITY, AND BENEFIT ACT RA 6981:
SEC 10. STATE WITNESS – person who has participated in the commission of a crime
and desires to be a witness for the state shall be admitted into the program whenever the
following circumstances are present:
1. the offense in which his testimony will be used is a grave felony as defined under RPC
or its equivalent under special laws;
2. absolute necessity for his testimony;
3. there is no direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense
committed;
4. his testimony can be substantially corroborated on its involving moral turpitude;
5. he does not appear to be the most guilty; and
6. he has not at any time been convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude
SEC. 11. SWORN STATEMENT – Before any person is admitted into the program he shall
execute a sworn statement describing in detail the manner the offense was committed
and his participation therein.
If his application is denied,said sworn statement and other testimony given in support of
said application shall not be admissible in evidence,except for impeachment purposes.
SEC.12 EFFECT OF ADMISSION OF A STATE WITNESS INTO THE PROGRAM –
Admission into the program shall entitle such state witness to immunity from criminal
prosecution for the offenses in which his testimony will be given and used.
SEC. 13. FAILURE OR REFUSAL OF THE WITNESS TO TESTIFY – Failure without just
cause when lawfully obliged to do so, shall be prosecuted for contempt. If he testifies
falsely or evasively, he shall be liable for perjury. His immunity shall be removed and he
shall be subject to contempt or criminal prosecution.
Section 4. Order in the examination of an individual witness.
ORDER:
1. direct examination;
2. crossexamination;
3. redirect examination;
4. recross examination;
PURPOSES OF CROSSEXAMINATION:
1. To discredit the witness;
2.To discredit the testimony of the witness;
3.To clarify certain matters;
4.To elicit admissions from a witness.
SCOPE OR LIMITS OF CROSSEXAMINATION:
1. ENGLISH RULE—where a witness is called to testify to a particular fact, he becomes a
witness for all purposes and may be fully crossexamined upon all matters material to
the issue, the examination not being confined to the matters inquired about in the
direct examination.
2. AMERICAN RULE—restricts crossexamination to facts and circumstances which are
connected with the matters that have been stated in the direct examination of the
witness.
Under Philippine jurisdiction, we follow the two rules, specifically under the following
instances:
In civil cases, we follow the English Rule, which allows the crossexamination to elicit all
important facts bearing upon the issue (Sec. 6), but this does not mean that a party by
doing so is making the witness his own in accordance with Section 5.
In two instances we follow the American Rule, 1. the accused may only be cross
examined on matters covered by direct examination,
2. hostile witness.
When crossexamination cannot be done or completed due to causes attributable to the
party who offered the witness, the incomplete testimony is rendered incompetent and
should be stricken from the record. Except where the prosecution witness was
extensively crossexamined on the material points and thereafter failed to appear and
cannot be produced despite a warrant for his arrest
PARTY CALLING THE FOLLOWING WITNESSES ARE NOT BOUND BY THEIR
TESTIMONY:
1. adverse party
2. hostile witness;
3. unwilling witness.
HOSTILE WITNESS A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so
declared by the court upon adequate showing of:
ihis adverse interest; or
iunjustified reluctance to testify; or
ihis having misled the party into calling him to the witness stand.
Section 9. Recalling witness.
GENERAL RULE: After the examination of a witness by both sides has been concluded,
the witness cannot be recalled without leave of court.
EXCEPTION:
ithe examination has not been concluded
irecall has been expressly reserved with the approval of the court
Section 10. Leading and misleading questions.
LEADING QUESTION—Question which suggests to the witness the answer which the
examining party desires.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. On preliminary matters;
2. On crossexamination;
3. To adverse party witness;
4. To hostile witness;
5. To unwilling witness;
6. To children of tender age;
7. To deafmutes;
8. To those who are ignorant;
9. To those who are of weak minds;
10. To the officers of the adverse party who is a juridical person.
Under the Rule on examination of a child witness, corroboration shall not be required of
a testimony of a child. His testimony, if credible by itself, shall be sufficient to support a
finding of fact, conclusion, or judgment subject to the standard of proof required in
criminal and noncriminal cases (Sec. 22 of the Rule on examination of a child witness).
MISLEADING QUESTION one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the
witness, or contrary to that which he has previously stated. It is NOT allowed.
Exceptions:
1. when waived
2. asking hypothetical questions to an expert witness
Only one counsel should be allowed to examine a witness in a single stage. However,
the other counsel may make objection to testimony.
REASONS:
1. To protect the witness from undue and confusing interrogation; and
2. To secure system and brevity by giving the control of the interrogation to a single
hand.
WHEN QUESTION PRELIMINARY—when the question does not touch on any issue.
A question that merely suggests a subject without suggesting an answer or a specific
thing is not a leading question. Example: “State whether anything occurred between you
and the defendants on the evening of January 9, 1913”.
Section 11. Impeachment of adverse party’s witness.
WAYS OF IMPEACHING ADVERSE PARTY’S WITNESS:
1. By contradictory evidence;
2. By evidence that the general reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity of the witness is
bad; or
3. By prior inconsistent statements.
PROCEDURE FOR IMPEACHING WITNESS BY EVIDENCE OF PRIOR INCONSISTENT
STATEMENTS (“LAYING THE PREDICATE”)
1. The statement must be related to him with the circumstances of the times and places
and the persons present;
Ùif the statement be in writing they must be shown to the witness before any
question is put to him concerning them; and
2. He must be asked whether he made such statements, and if so, allowed to EXPLAIN
them.
NOTE: Where the previous statements of a witness are offered as evidence of an
admission, and not merely to impeach him, the rule on laying the predicate does not
apply.
Section 13. How witness impeached by evidence of inconsistent statements.
GENERAL RULE: a party who voluntarily offers the testimony of a witness in the case is
bound by the testimony of the said witness.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. in the case of a hostile witness
2. where the witness is the adverse party or the representative of a judicial person which
is the adverse party; and
3. when the witness is not voluntarily offered but is required by law to be presented by
the proponent as in the case of subscribing witness
Section 16. When witness may refer to memorandum.
REVIVAL OF PRESENT MEMORY/ PRESENT RECOLLECTION REVIVED A witness may
be allowed to refresh his memory respecting a fact, by anything written or recorded by
himself or under his direction as the time when the fact occurred, or immediately
thereafter.
PAST RECOLLECTION RECORDED/REVIVAL OF PAST RECOLLECTION A witness may
also testify from such writing or record, though he retains no recollection of the
particular facts, if he is able to swear that the writing or record correctly stated the
transaction when made, but such evidence must be received with caution.
PRESENT MEMORY PAST RECOLLECTION
REVIVED RECORDED
Memory is obscure but Recollection is zero
there is still memory;
The main evidence is The main evidence is
the testimony of the the memorandum.
witness and the
memorandum;
The witness simply Witness must swear
testifies that he knows that the writing
that the memorandum correctly states the
is correctly written by transaction.
him or under his
direction; no need to
swear.
The memorandum from which the witness may be permitted to refresh his memory need
not be an original writing. It is sufficient if it is shown that the witness knows the copy to
be a true one, and his memory refreshed thereby enables him to testify from his own
recollection of the facts, independent of his confidence in the accuracy of the copy.
Section 17. When part of transaction, writing or record given in evidence, the remainder
admissible.
RULE ON COMPLETENESS—When part of an act, declaration, conversation, writing or
record is given in evidence by one party, the whole of the same subject may be inquired
into by the other, and when a detached act, declaration, conversation, writing, or record
is given in evidence, any other act, declaration, conversation, writing or record necessary
may also be given in evidence.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS
Section 19. Classes of documents.
AUTHENTICATION—PROVING the due execution and genuineness of the document.
CLASSES OF DOCUMENTS:
For the purpose of their presentation in evidence, documents are either in public or
private (Sec. 19).
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS:
1. The written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign authority,
official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a
foreign country;
2. Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last wills and testaments;
and
3. Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to be
entered therein.
PUBLIC WRITING DISTINGUISHED FROM PRIVATE WRITING:
PUBLIC PRIVATE
WRITING WRITING
As to a public a private writing
authenticity document is must be proved
admissible relative to its
evidence, due execution
without further and
proof of its genuinenessits
genuineness authenticity
and due before it may be
execution received in
evidence.
As to persons a public a private writing
bound instrument is binds only the
evidence even parties who
against third executed them
persons, of the or their privies,
fact which gave insofar as due
rise to its due execution and
execution and date of the
to the date of document are
the latter; concerned.
As to validity certain
of certain transactions
transactions must be in a
public
document,
otherwise they
will not be
given any
validity.
The following are private writings which may be admitted in evidence without previous
proof of its authenticity and due execution:
1. When the genuineness and due execution of the document is admitted by the
adverse party;
2. When such genuineness and due execution are immaterial to the issue;
3. When the document is an ANCIENT DOCUMENT;
NOTE: Ancient Document Rule applies only if there are no other witnesses to determine
authenticity.
ECOMMERCE LAW
R.A. 8792
Electronic Document – It refers to information or representation of information, date,
figures, symbols by which a right is established or an obligation extinguished, or which a
fact may be proved and affirmed which is received, recorded, transmitted, stored,
processed, retrieved or produced electronically.
Electronic Data Message – refers to information generated, sent, received or stored by
electronic, optical or similar means.
Electronic Signature – refers to any distinctive mark, characteristic and/or sound in
electronic form, representing the identity of a person and attached to or logically
associated with the electronic data message or electronic document or any methodology
or procedures employed or adopted by a person and executed or adopted by such
person with the intention of authenticating or approving an electronic data message or
electronic document.
REQUISITES FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT:
a. Where the law required a document to be in writing, the requirement is met by an
electronic document if the said electronic document maintains its integrity and
reliability and can be authenticated so as be usable for subsequent reference.
(i) The electronic document has remained complete and unaltered, apart from the
addition of any endorsement and any authorized change or any change which
arises in the normal course of communication, storage and display; and
(ii) The electronic document is reliable in the light of the purpose for which it was
generated and in the light of all relevant circumstances.
b. Paragraph (a) applies whether the requirement therein is in the form of an obligation or
whether the law simply provides consequences for the document not being
presented or retained in its original form.
c. Where the law requires that the document be presented or retained in its original
form, that requirement is met by an electronic document if
(i) There exist a reliable assurance as to the integrity of the document from the time
it was first generated in its final form; and
(ii) That document is capable of being displayed to the person to whom it is to be
presented; provided that no provision of his act shall apply to vary any and all
requirements of existing laws on formalities required in the execution of
documents for their validity.
For evidentiary purposes, an electronic document shall be the functional equivalent of a
written document under existing laws.
BURDEN OF PROOF: The person seeking to introduce an electronic data message or
elctronic document in any legal proceeding has the burden of proving its authenticity by
evidence capable of supporting a finding that the electronic data message or electronic
document is what the person claims to be.
RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
(August 1, 2001)
Manner of Authentication of electronic documents:
1. By evidence that it has been digitally signed by the person purported to have signed
the same;
2. By evidence that other appropriate security procedures or devices as may be
authorized by the Supreme Court or by law for authentication of electronic documents
were applied to the document.
3. By other evidence showing its integrity and reliability to the satisfaction of the judge.
Authentication of Electronic Signatures:
1. The electronic signature is that of the person to whom it correlates;
2. By any other means provided by law;
3. By any other means satisfactory to the judge as establishing the genuineness of the
electronic signature.
Business Records as Exception to the Hearsay Rule:
A memorandum, report, record or data compilation of acts, events, conditions, opinions
or diagnoses, made by electronic, optical, or other similar means at or near the time of or
from transmission or supply of information by a person with knowledge thereof, and kept
in the regular course or conduct of business activity, and such was the regular practice
to make the memorandum, report, record or data compilation by electronic, optical, or
similar means, all of which are shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified
witnesses, is excepted from the rule on hearsay evidence.
This presumption may be overcome by evidence of the untrustworthiness of the source
of information or the method or circumstances of the preparation, transmission or
storage thereof.
METHOD OF PROOF:
All matters relating to the admissibility and evidentiary weight of electronic document
may be established by an affidavit stating facts of direct personal knowledge of the
affiant or based on authentic records . The affidavit must affirmatively show the
competence of the affiant to testify on the matters contained therein.
Cross Examination: The affiant shall be made to affirm the contents of the affidavit in
open court and may be crossexamined as a matter of right by the adverse party.
C. OFFER AND OBJECTION
Section 34. Offer of evidence.
Why purpose of offer must be specified — to determine whether that piece of evidence
should be admitted or not.
Because such evidence may be admissible for several purposes under the doctrine of
multiple admissibility, or may be admissible for one purpose and not for another,
otherwise the adverse party cannot interpose the proper objection. Evidence submitted
for one purpose may not be considered for any other purpose.
NOTE: Where the evidence is inadmissible for the purpose stated in the offer, it must be
rejected, though the same may be admissible for another purpose. The reason is that the
adverse party is prevented from objecting to the admissibility thereof on grounds other
than those available to meet the stated purpose.
In Mata Vda. De Onate vs. CA, the Court allowed evidence not formally offered to be
admitted and considered by the trial court provided the following requirements are
present:
1. the same must have been duly identified by testimony duly recorded;
2. the same must have been incorporated to the records of the case.
Section 35. When to make offer.
WHEN OFFER OF TESTIMONIAL/ORAL EVIDENCE MADE—at the time the witness is
called to testify.
There is another kind of offer: AN IMPLIED OFFER. Every time a question is asked of a
witness, there is an implied automatic offer of the evidence sought to be enlisted by the
question. If there is any objection to the question, the same must be raised immediately,
otherwise, there is a waiver, because there is an implied automatic offer of evidence for
every specific evidence called for by a specific question.
THEREFORE, oral evidence is always being offered twice:
1. before the witness testifies; and
2. every time a question is asked of him.
WHEN OFFER OF DOCUMENTARY AND OBJECT EVIDENCE SHOULD BE MADE—after
the party has presented his testimonial evidence. Before he rests, he must make a
formal offer of all his documentary and object evidence and specify the purposes for
which he is offering these evidence.
PROCEDURE BEFORE DOCUMENTARY AND OBJECT EVIDENCE CAN BE CONSIDERED
BY THE COURT:
1.marking;
2.identification;
3.authentication;
4.formal offer; and
5.if the evidence is excluded, an offer of proof.
Of course, you can dispense with authentication and identification if there is a stipulation
on the due execution and genuineness of the document.
a. if it is a private document, then there is a need for a stipulation on that.
b. if it is a public document, then there is a need for authentication.
STAGES IN THE PRESENTATION OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE:
1. IDENTIFICATION
By identification is meant a proof that the document being presented is the same one referred
to by the witness in his testimony.
2. MARKING
All exhibit should be marked to facilitate their identification. The marking may be made at
the pretrial or during the trial.
The plaintiff and the prosecution use capital letters (“A”, “B”, “C”, etc.) and the accused use
Arabic numbers (“1”, “2”, “3”, etc.)
If the exhibit is presented in connection with an affidavit, like in support or in opposition to a
motion to dismiss, the words “Motion to Dismiss” should be added after the letter or number.
3. AUTHENTICATION
The proof of a document’s due execution and genuineness if the purpose is to show that it is
genuine, or the proof of its forgery, if the purpose is to show that the document is a forgery.
4. INSPECTION
Under Section 18 of Rule 132, whenever a writing is shown to a witness, it may be
inspected by the adverse party.
5. FORMAL OFFER
After the termination of the testimonial evidence, the proponent will then make a formal offer
and state the purpose for which the document is presented (Rule 132, Sec. 34)
6. OBJECTIONS
The objection to the introduction or presentation of the document shall be made when it is
formally offered in evidence (Rule 132, Sec. 36)
There is a distinction between identification of documentary evidence and formal offer of
documentary evidence as an exhibit:
a. In identification of documentary evidence, the same is done in the course of the trial
and is accompanied by the marking of the evidence as an exhibit.
2. In formal offer of a documentary evidence as an exhibit, the same is done when the
party has presented his testimonial evidence.
The mere fact that a particular document is identified and marked as an exhibit does not
mean that it will be or has been offered as part of the evidence of the party. The party
may decide to formally offer it if it believes this will advance its cause, and then again it
may decide not to do so at all.
Section 36. Objection
MODES OF EXCLUDING INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE:
1. Objectionwhen the evidence is offered.
2. Motion to strike out or Expunge – proper in the following cases:
a. when the witness answers prematurely before there is reasonable
opportunity for the party to object (Sec. 39);
b. unresponsive answers;
c. answers that are incompetent, irrelevant, or improper (Sec. 39);
d. uncompleted testimonies where there was no opportunity for the other party
to crossexamine.
Section 40. Tender of excluded evidence
What is meant by “tender of excluded evidence”?
Where the court refuses to permit the counsel to present testimony which he thinks is
competent, material and necessary to prove his case, the method of properly preserving
the record to the end that the question may be saved for the purpose of review, is
through the making of an offer of proof (tender of excluded evidence).
PURPOSES:
1. to inform the court what is expected to be proved; and
2. procuring exceptions to the exclusion of the offered evidence so that the appellate
court may determine from the record whether the proposed evidence is competent.
How made?
a. As to documentary or object evidence:
May have the same attached to or made part of the record.
b. As to oral evidence:
May state for the record the name and other personal circumstances of the witness
and the substance of the proposed testimony.
OFFER OF OFFER OF EVIDENCE
PROOF/TENDER OF
EXCLUDED EVIDENCE
Only resorted to if Refers to testimonial,
admission is refused documentary or object
by the court for evidence that are
purposes of review on presented or offered in
appeal. court by a party so that
the court can consider
his evidence when it
comes to the
preparation of the
decision
RULE ON CONTINUING OBJECTIONS – If the same class of evidence is presented by a
proponent and it is objected to by the adverse party, and a court has already made a
ruling on the objection, the adverse party does not have to repeat the objection all over
again. The adverse party can just tell the court that he is giving a continuing objection to
the line of question propounded. The advantage of this, is on appeal, it will appear on the
record of the case that there is an objection made in the trial court. It is always important
that the records indicate that an objection has been made because an objection that has
not been made is a waiver.
Evidence presented during the hearing of the motions will also be considered evidence
during trial of the case.
RULE 133
WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE
WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE—probative value or credit that the court gives to particular
evidence admitted to prove a fact in issue.
Section 1. Preponderance of evidence, how determined.
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE—evidence which is of greater weight or more
convincing or superior weight of evidence than that which is offered in opposition to it.
REASONABLE DOUBT — doubt engendered by an investigation of the whole proof and
an inability, after such investigation, to let the mind rest easy upon the certainty of guilt.
Absolute certainty of guilt is not demanded by the law to convict a person charged for
the commission of an offense, but moral certainty is requires as to every proposition of
proof requisite to constitute the offense.
EQUIPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE — The evidence of both parties when placed on the
division scale is balance. In civil cases, this means that the court will rule in favor of the
party who has no burden of proof. In criminal cases, this means acquittal of the accused.
POSITIVE TESTIMONY DISTINGUISHED FROM NEGATIVE TESTIMONY:
POSITIVE TESTIMONY—is when the witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur;
NEGATIVE TESTIMONY—is when a witness states that he did not see or know of the
occurrence of a fact.
Positive testimony has greater weight than negative evidence.
ALIBI must be established by positive, clear and satisfactory evidence.
Requisites:
1. showing that not only is the accused somewhere else
2. but also it was physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime at the
time of its commission.
One of the weakest defenses because of the facility with which it can be fabricated.
OUT OF COURT IDENTIFICATION: The Supreme Court has held that on the admissibility
and reliability of outofcourt identification of suspects, courts have adopted the “totality
of circumstances” test which utilizes the following factors:
1. the witness’ opportunity to view the criminal at the time of the crime;
2. the witness’ degree of attention at that time;
3. the accuracy of any prior description given by the witness;
4. the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the identification;
5. the length of time between the crime and the identification; and
6. the suggestiveness of the identification procedure
RES IPSA LOQUITUR (The thing speaks for itself) a maxim for the rule that the fact of the
occurrence of an injury, taken with the surrounding circumstances, may permit an
inference or raise a presumption of negligence, or make out a plaintiff’s prima facie case,
and present a question of fact for the defendant to meet with an explanation. The
doctrine is simply a recognition of postulate that as a matter of common knowledge and
experience, the very nature of certain types of occurrences may justify an inference of
negligence on the part of person who controls the instrumentality causing the injury, in
the absence of some explanation by him. However, it does not dispense with the
requirement of proof of negligence.
RULE ON PARTIAL CREDIBILITY:
Falsus in uno, Falsus in omnibus (False in one thing, false in everything)
If the testimony of the witness on a material issue is willfully false and given with an
intention to deceive, court may disregard all the witness’ testimony.
IMPORTANT:
a. Deals only with the weight of evidence and not a positive rule of law.
b. The witnesses’ false or exaggerated statements on other matters shall not preclude
the acceptance of such evidence as is relieved from any sign of falsehood.
c. The court may accept and reject portions of the witness’ testimony depending on the
inherent credibility thereof.
This is NOT a mandatory rule of evidence but is applied by the courts in its discretion.
Section. 3 Extrajudicial confession, not sufficient ground for conviction.
An extrajudicial confession is not sufficient ground for conviction UNLESS corroborated
by evidence of corpus delicti.
CORPUS DELICTI—the actual commission by someone of the particular crime charged.
2 Elements:
1. the existence of a certain act or result which is the basis of the criminal charge
2. the existence of a criminal agency as the cause of the act or result.
NOTE: The identity of the accused is not a necessary element of the corpus delicti.
Section 4. Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient.
It is sufficient for conviction if:
a. There is more than one circumstance;
b. The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
c. The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt.
Direct evidence distinguished from circumstantial evidence.
Circumstantial
Direct Evidence
Evidence
establishes the does not prove the
existence of a fact in existence of a fact in
issue without the aid of issue directly, but merely
any inference or provides for logical
presumption. inference that such fact
really exists.
the witnesses testify each proof is given of
directly of their own facts and circumstances
knowledge as to the from which the court
main facts to be proved. may infer other
connected facts which
reasonably follow,
according to the
common experience of
mankind.
Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Watermark theme. Powered by Blogger.
Higit Pa escobalvictoria@gmail.com Dashboard Magsign Out
QUANTUM JURIS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 3- EVIDENCE Home
Page 3 EVIDENCE CIVIL PROCEDURE
Page 1 EVIDENCE
Page 2 EVIDENCE
TESTIMONIAL KNOWLEDGE
Page 3 EVIDENCE
Section 36. Testimony generally confined to personal knowledge; hearsay excluded. Page 4 EVIDENCE
RULES ON EVIDENCE
GENERAL RULE: A witness can testify only to those facts which he knows of his
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS
personal knowledge; that is, which are derived from his own perception, except as
otherwise provided in these rules. RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
CivPro by Dean Inigo
REASON FOR EXCLUDING HEARSAY: not subject to the test of truth because there is no
Rules of Civil Proc (enumerations)
opportunity for crossexamination. Also, this will be a violation of the constitutional right
to confrontation. 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(15)
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(622)
HEARSAY RULE
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(2329 Depositions)
CLASSIFICATION OF OUTOFCOURT STATEMENTS: 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(3039)
1. HEARSAY Those which are considered as hearsay and therefore inadmissible, 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(4143 APPEALS)
this occurs when the purpose for introducing the ourofcourt statement is to prove
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(4456)
the truth of the facts asserted therein;
2. NONHEARSAY— Admissible. This occurs when the purpose for introducing the 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(5761 Prov
Remedies)
statement is not to prove the truth of the facts asserted therein but only the making of
the statements and are admissible in evidence when the making of the statement is 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(6271 Spl Civil
Action)
relevant. These are socalled INDEPENDENTLY RELEVANT STATEMENTS.
3. EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE—Those which are hearsay but are
considered as exceptions to the hearsay rule and are therefore admissible. These are
Blog Archive
from Sections 37 to 47 of Rule 130.
▼ 2013 (1)
HEARSAY EVIDENCE: ▼ January (1)
They are admissible by reason of NECESSITY and TRUSTWORTHINESS.
INTRODUCTION
Hearsay evidence not objected to may be admissible but, whether objected to or not, has
no probative value and as opposed to direct and primary evidence, the latter always
prevails. LINKS
EXCEPTIONS TO THE HEARSAY RULE: SUPREME COURT
1. Dying Declaration; LawPhilArellano
2. Declaration Against Interest;
Chan Robles Virtual Libray
3. Act or declaration About pedigree;
4. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree;
5. Common reputation;
6. Res Gestae;
7. Entries in the ordinary course of business;
8. Entries in official records;
9. Commercial lists;
10. Learned treatises;
11. Testimony or deposition at a former proceeding
Section 37. Dying declaration
REQUISITES:
1. That death is imminent and the declarant is conscious of that fact;
2. That the declaration refers to the cause and and surrounding circumstances of such
death;
3. That the declaration relates to the facts which the victim is competent to testify to;
and
4. That the declaration is offered in a case wherein the declarant’s death is subject of
the inquiry.
A dying declaration may be oral or written or made by signs which could be interpreted
and testified to by a witness thereto.
Dying Declarations favorable to the accused are admissible.
Dying declaration may also be regarded as part of the res gestae as they were made soon
after the startling occurrence without the opportunity for fabrication or concoction.
Dying declaration is not considered a confidential communication between spouses.
A dying declaration may be attacked on the ground that any of the requisites for its
admissibility are not present and the same may be impeached in the same manner as the
testimony of any other witness on the stand.
HEARSAY EXCEPTION IN CHILD ABUSE CASES:
A statement made by a child describing any act or attempted act of child abuse, not
otherwise admissible under the hearsay rule, may be admitted in evidence in any criminal
or noncriminal proceeding subject to the following rules:
(a) Before such hearsay statement maybe admitted, its proponent shall make known
to the adverse party the intention to offer such statement and its particulars to provide
him a fair opportunity to object.
If the child is available, the court shall, upon motion of the adverse party, require the
child to be present at the presentation of the hearsay statement for crossexamination by
the adverse party. When the child is unavailable, the fact of such circumstance must be
proved by the proponent.
(b) In ruling on the admissibility of such hearsay statement, the court shall consider the
time, content and circumstances thereof, based on various factors provided by the law,
which provide sufficient indicia of reliability (Sec. 28(a) and (b), The Rule on Examination
of a Child Witness).
Section 38. Declarations against interest.
REQUISITES:
1. That the declarant is dead or unable to testify;
2. That it relates to a fact against the interests of the declarant;
3. That at the time he made said declaration the declarant was aware that the same was
contrary to his aforesaid interest; and
4. That the declarant had no motive to falsify and he believed such declaration to be
true.
Section 39. Act or declaration about pedigree.
Section 40. Family reputation or tradition regarding pedigree.
Section 39 Section 40
Act or declaration Family reputation or
about PEDIGREE; tradition regarding
pedigree;
Witness need not be a Witness is a member of
member of the family; the family;
Testimony is about Testimony is about
what declarant, dead or family reputation or
unable to testify, has tradition covering
said concerning the matters of pedigree.
pedigree of the
declarant’s family.
Section 41: Common reputation
The following may be established by common reputation:
1. Matters of public interest more than 30 yrs. old;
2. matters of general interest more than 30 years old;
3. matters respecting marriage or moral character and related facts
4. individual moral character
COMMON REPUTATION—is the definite opinion of the community in which the fact to be
prove is known or exists. It means the general or substantially undivided reputation, as
distinguished from a partial or qualified one, although it need not be unanimous.
ÙAs a general rule, the reputation of person should be that existing in the place of his
residence, it may also be that existing in the place where he is best known.
EVIDENCE OF NEGATIVE GOOD REPUTE:
Where the foundation proof shows that the witness was in such position that he would
have heard reports derogatory to one’s character, the reputation testimony may be
predicated on the absence of reports of bad reputation or on the fact that the witness had
heard nothing against the person.
Section 42: Part of res gestae
RES GESTAE – literally means things done; it includes the circumstances, facts, and
declarations incidental to the main fact or transaction necessary to illustrate its character
and also includes acts, words or declaration which are closely connected therewith as to
constitute part of the transaction.
TWO TYPES OF RES GESTAE:
1. Statements made by a person while a startling occurrence is taking place or
immediately prior or subsequent thereto with respect to the circumstances thereof
(SPONTANEOUS STATEMENTS)
2. Statements accompanying an equivocal act material to the issue, and giving it a legal
significance (VERBAL ACTS).
REQUISITES OF ADMISSIBILITY OF SPONTANEOUS STATEMENTS:
1. there must be a startling occurrence
2. the statement must relate to the circumstances of the starling occurrence
3. the statement must be spontaneous
REQUISITES OF ADMISSIBILITY OF VERBAL ACTS:
1. the act or occurrence characterized must be equivocal
2. verbal acts must characterize or explain the equivocal act
3. equivocal act must be relevant to the issue
4. verbal acts must be contemporaneous with the equivocal act
DYING
RES GESTAE in DECLARATIONS
connection with a
homicidal act
Maybe made by the Can be made only by
killer himself after or the victim
during the killing or that
of a 3rd person
May precede, Made only after the
accompany or be made homicidal attack has
after the homicidal been committed
attack was committed
Justification in the Trustworthiness based
spontaneity of the upon its being given
statement an awareness of
impending death
SPONTANEOUS
VERBAL ACTS
STATEMENTS
the res gestae is the the res gestae is the
equivocal act startling occurrence
verbal act must be statements may be
contemporaneous with made prior, while or
or must accompany the immediately after the
equivocal act startling occurrence
Section 44. Entries in official records.
REQUISITES FOR ADMISSIBILITY OF OFFICIAL ENTRIES:
1. that it was made by a public officer or by another person specially enjoined by law to
do so
2. that it was made by a public officer in the performance of his duty, or by another
person in the performance of a duty specially enjoined by law
3. the public officer or the other person had sufficient knowledge of the facts by him
stated, which must have been acquired by him personally or through official
information
Probative value: only prima facie evidence of the fact stated therein
OPINION RULE
Section 48. General rule
GENERAL RULE: Opinion of a witness is not admissible.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. On a matter requiring SPECIAL knowledge, skill, experience or training which he is
shown to possess (Sec. 49);
2. The identity of a person about whom he has adequate knowledge (Sec. 50[a]);
3. A handwriting with which he has sufficient familiarity (Sec. 50 [b]);
4. The mental sanity of a person with whom he is sufficiently acquainted (Sec. 50 [c]);
5. The witness’ impressions of the emotion, behavior, condition or appearance of a
person (Sec. 50 [d]);.
Expert evidence is admissible only if
a) the matter to be testified requires expertise and
b) the witness has been qualified as en expert.
Hypothetical questions may be asked of an expert to elicit his opinion. Courts, however,
are not necessarily bound by the expert’s findings.
CHARACTER EVIDENCE
Section 51. Character evidence generally not admissible; exceptions
GENERAL RULE: character evidence is not admissible in evidence under Sec.51 of Rule
130 of the Revised Rules on Evidence.
EXCEPTIONS:
CRIMINAL CASES:
1. accused may prove his good moral character which is pertinent to the moral trait
involved in the offense charge.
2. The prosecution may not prove bad moral character of the accused unless in rebuttal
when the latter opens the issue by introducing evidence of his Good moral character.
3. As to the offended party, his good or bad moral character may be proved as long as it
tends to establish the probability or improbability of the offense charged
EXCEPTIONS:
1. proof of the bad character of the victim in a murder case is not admissible if the
crime was committed through treachery and premeditation; and
2. in prosecution for rape, evidence of complainant’s past sexual conduct, opinion
thereof or of his/her reputation shall not be admitted unless, and only to the
extent that the court finds that such evidence is material and relevant to the case
(Rape Shield, RA 8505 Sec. 6).
CIVIL CASES
The moral character of either party thereto cannot be proved unless it is pertinent to the
issue of character involved in the case.
AS TO WITNESSES:
Both criminal and civil the bad moral character of a witness may always be proved by
either party (Sec. 11, Rule 132) but not evidence of his good moral character, unless it has
been impeached. (Sec. 14)
RULE 131
BURDEN OF PROOF AND PRESUMPTIONS:
Section 1. Burden of Proof
BURDEN OF PROOF/RISK OF NONPERSUASION—the duty of a party to present
evidence on the facts in issue necessary to establish his claim or defense by the amount
of evidence required by law.
UPON WHOM BURDEN OF PROOF RESTS:
A. Civil Cases
1. the plaintiff has the burden of proof to show the truth of his allegations if the defendant
raises a negative defense
2. the defendant has the burden of proof if he raises an affirmative defense on the
complaint of the plaintiff
B. Criminal Cases
The burden of proof is with the prosecution by reason of the presumption of innocence.
NOTE: Under the Speedy Trial Act, if the accused is NOT brought to trial within the time
required, the information shall be dismissed on the motion of the accused. In this case,
the BURDEN OF PROOF of supporting such motion is with the accused (Sec. 13, RA
8493).
DEGREE OF PROOF THAT SATISFIES THE BURDEN OF PROOF:
A. CIVIL CASES
Preponderance of evidence
B. CRIMINAL CASES
1. To sustain conviction
Evidence of guilt beyond reasonable doubt
2. Preliminary investigation
Engender a well founded belief of the fact of the commission of a crime.
3. Issuance of warrant of arrest
Probable cause, i.e. that there is reasonable ground to believe that the accused has
committed an offense.
HEIRARCHY OF EVIDENCE:
1. proof beyond reasonable doubt
2. clear and convincing evidence
3. preponderance of evidence
4. substantial evidence
BURDEN OF EVIDENCE—logical necessity on a party during a particular time of the trial
to create a prima facie case in his favor or to destroy that created against him by
presenting evidence.
In both civil and criminal cases, the burden of evidence lies on the party who asserts an
affirmative allegation.
BURDEN OF PROOF BURDEN OF EVIDENCE
Does not shift Shifts from party to
party depending upon
the exigencies of the
case in the course of
the trial;
Generally determined Generally determined
by the pleadings filed by the developments of
by the party the trial, or by the
provisions of
substantive law or
procedural rules which
may relieve the party
from presenting
evidence on the facts
alleged.
UPON WHOM BURDEN OF EVIDENCE RESTS:
A. CIVIL CASES:
The plaintiff has to prove his affirmative allegations in the complaint and the defendant
has to prove the affirmative allegations in his counterclaim and his affirmative defenses.
B. CRIMINAL CASES:
The PROSECUTION has to prove its affirmative allegations in the information regarding
the elements of the crime as well as the attendant circumstances; while the DEFENSE
has to prove its affirmative allegations regarding the existence of justifying or exempting
circumstances, absolutory causes or mitigating circumstances.
PRINCIPLE OF NEGATIVING AVERMENTS
Is a party required to prove negative allegations?
GENERAL RULE: NO. They need not be proved, whether in a civil or criminal action.
EXCEPTION: Where such negative allegations are essential parts of the cause of action
or defense in a civil case, or are essential ingredients of the offense in a criminal case or
defenses thereto.
HOWEVER, in civil cases, even if the negative allegation is an essential part of the cause
of action or defense, such negative allegation does not have to be proved if it is only for
the purpose of denying the existence of a document which should properly be in the
custody of the adverse party.
PRESUMPTIONS an inference of the existence or nonexistence of a fact which courts
are permitted to draw from the proof of other facts.
CLASSIFICATION OF PRESUMPTIONS:
1. PRESUMPTION IS JURIS OR OF LAW—deduction which the law expressly directs to
be made from particular facts.
2. PRESUMPTION IS HOMINIS OR OF FACT—deduction which reason draws from facts
proved without an express direction from the law to that effect.
PRESUMPTIONS OF PRESUMPTIONS OF
LAW FACT
Certain inference must A discretion is vested
be made whenever the in the tribunal as to
facts appear which drawing the inference
furnish the basis of the
inference
Reduced to fix rules Derived wholly and
and form a part of the directly from the
system of circumstances of the
jurisprudence particular case by
means of the common
experience of mankind
PRESUMPTION IS JURIS may be divided into:
1. CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTION (juris et de jure)—which is a presumption of law that is
not permitted to be overcome by any proof to the contrary; and
2. DISPUTABLE PRESUMPTIONS (juris tantum)—is that which the law permits to be
overcome or contradicted by proofs to the contrary; otherwise, the same remains
satisfactory.
Presumptions are evidence according to the law, which considers and regulates them as
such. As they constitute evidence, presumptions are irrelevant and therefore
inadmissible when they do not correspond to the allegation and the facts at issue in the
pleadings.
CLASSES OF CONCLUSIVE PRESUMPTIONS under RULE 131:
1. ESTOPPEL IN PAIS (Rule 131, Sec. 2(par. a)—whenever a party has, by his own
declaration, act or omission, intentionally and deliberately led another to believe a
particular thing to be true and to act upon such belief, he cannot, in any litigation
arising out of such declaration, act or omission, be permitted to falsify it.
2 ESTOPPEL BY DEED (Rule 131, Sec. 2 (par. b)—the tenant is not permitted to deny the
title of his landlord at the time of the commencement of the relation of landlord and
tenant between them.
ÙDisputable presumption of regularity apply to both government and private
transactions
WHEN PRESUMPTION OF “EVIDENCE WILLFULY SUPPRESSED WOULD BE ADVERSE IF
PRODUCED” will not apply:
1. If the suppression is NOT willful;
2. If the evidence that is withheld is merely corroborative or cumulative;
3. If the evidence is at the disposal of or equally available to both parties;
4. If the suppression is an exercise of a privilege.
For the presumption that “A LETTER DULY DIRECTED AND MAILED WAS RECEIVED IN A
REGULAR COURSE OF THE MAIL” to arise, it must be proved that the letter was properly
addressed with postage prepared and that it was actually mailed.
Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Watermark theme. Powered by Blogger.
Higit Pa escobalvictoria@gmail.com Dashboard Magsign Out
QUANTUM JURIS
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page 4- EVIDENCE Home
CIVIL PROCEDURE
Page 1 EVIDENCE
Page 2 EVIDENCE
RULE 132
Page 3 EVIDENCE
PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE
EXAMINATION OF WITNESSES Page 4 EVIDENCE
RULES ON EVIDENCE
Section 1. Examination to be done in open court.
NEGOTIABLE INSTRUMENTS
HOW ORAL EVIDENCE GIVEN—It is usually given orally, in open court. Therefore, RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
generally, the testimonies of witnesses cannot be presented in affidavits. CivPro by Dean Inigo
ÙOne instance when the testimonies of witnesses may be given in affidavits is under the
Rules of Civil Proc (enumerations)
rule on summary procedure.
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(15)
PURPOSE: to enable the court to judge the credibility of the witness by the witness’ 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(622)
manner of testifying, their intelligence and their appearance.
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(2329 Depositions)
The form and nature of the questions that may and may not be propounded to a witness 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(3039)
are as follows: 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(4143 APPEALS)
iQuestions must not be indefinite or uncertain;
1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(4456)
iQuestions must be relevant;
iQuestions must not be argumentative; 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(5761 Prov
Remedies)
iQuestions must not call for conclusion of law;
iQuestions must not call for opinion or hearsay evidence; 1997 RULES OF CIVPRO(6271 Spl Civil
Action)
iQuestions must not call for illegal answer;
iQuestions must not call for selfincriminating testimony;
iQuestions must not be leading;
Blog Archive
iQuestions must not be misleading;
iQuestions must not tend to degrade reputation of witness; ▼ 2013 (1)
iQuestions must not be repetitious. ▼ January (1)
INTRODUCTION
Section 3: Rights and obligations of a witness.
RIGHTS OF A WITNESS:
1. To be protected from irrelevant, improper, or insulting questions, and from harsh or LINKS
insulting demeanor;
2. Not to be detained longer than the interests of justice require; SUPREME COURT
3. Not to be examined except only as to matters pertinent to the issue; LawPhilArellano
4. Not to give an answer which will tend to subject him to a penalty for an offense unless
Chan Robles Virtual Libray
otherwise provided by law;
5. Not to give an answer which will tend to degrade his reputation, unless it be to the very
fact at issue or to a fact from which the fact at issue would be presumed. But a
witness must answer to the fact of his previous final conviction for an offense.
The exception under no. 4 refers to immunity statutes wherein the witness is granted
immunity from criminal prosecution for offenses admitted in his testimony, e.g. under
Sec. 8, R.A. 1379, the law providing for the forfeiture of unlawfully acquired property; and
under P.D. 749, in prosecutions for bribery and graft.
CLASSIFICATION OF IMMUNITY STATUTES:
Use Immunity prohibits use of witness’ compelled testimony and its fruit in any manner
in connection with the criminal prosecution of the witness. It does not render a witness
immune from prosecution despite invocation of right against self incrimination
Transactional Immunity grants immunity to the witness from prosecution for an offense
to which his compelled testimony relates.
NOTE: For purposes of evidence, Right against self incrimination refers only to
testimonial compulsion.
Right against selfincrimination is granted only in favor of individuals, hence, a
corporation cannot invoke that privilege as the question testimony can come only from a
corporate officer or employee who has a personality distinct from that of the corporation.
Right against selfincrimination extends to administrative proceedings with a criminal or
penal aspect.
WITNESS PROTECTION, SECURITY, AND BENEFIT ACT RA 6981:
SEC 10. STATE WITNESS – person who has participated in the commission of a crime
and desires to be a witness for the state shall be admitted into the program whenever the
following circumstances are present:
1. the offense in which his testimony will be used is a grave felony as defined under RPC
or its equivalent under special laws;
2. absolute necessity for his testimony;
3. there is no direct evidence available for the proper prosecution of the offense
committed;
4. his testimony can be substantially corroborated on its involving moral turpitude;
5. he does not appear to be the most guilty; and
6. he has not at any time been convicted of any crime involving moral turpitude
SEC. 11. SWORN STATEMENT – Before any person is admitted into the program he shall
execute a sworn statement describing in detail the manner the offense was committed
and his participation therein.
If his application is denied,said sworn statement and other testimony given in support of
said application shall not be admissible in evidence,except for impeachment purposes.
SEC.12 EFFECT OF ADMISSION OF A STATE WITNESS INTO THE PROGRAM –
Admission into the program shall entitle such state witness to immunity from criminal
prosecution for the offenses in which his testimony will be given and used.
SEC. 13. FAILURE OR REFUSAL OF THE WITNESS TO TESTIFY – Failure without just
cause when lawfully obliged to do so, shall be prosecuted for contempt. If he testifies
falsely or evasively, he shall be liable for perjury. His immunity shall be removed and he
shall be subject to contempt or criminal prosecution.
Section 4. Order in the examination of an individual witness.
ORDER:
1. direct examination;
2. crossexamination;
3. redirect examination;
4. recross examination;
PURPOSES OF CROSSEXAMINATION:
1. To discredit the witness;
2.To discredit the testimony of the witness;
3.To clarify certain matters;
4.To elicit admissions from a witness.
SCOPE OR LIMITS OF CROSSEXAMINATION:
1. ENGLISH RULE—where a witness is called to testify to a particular fact, he becomes a
witness for all purposes and may be fully crossexamined upon all matters material to
the issue, the examination not being confined to the matters inquired about in the
direct examination.
2. AMERICAN RULE—restricts crossexamination to facts and circumstances which are
connected with the matters that have been stated in the direct examination of the
witness.
Under Philippine jurisdiction, we follow the two rules, specifically under the following
instances:
In civil cases, we follow the English Rule, which allows the crossexamination to elicit all
important facts bearing upon the issue (Sec. 6), but this does not mean that a party by
doing so is making the witness his own in accordance with Section 5.
In two instances we follow the American Rule, 1. the accused may only be cross
examined on matters covered by direct examination,
2. hostile witness.
When crossexamination cannot be done or completed due to causes attributable to the
party who offered the witness, the incomplete testimony is rendered incompetent and
should be stricken from the record. Except where the prosecution witness was
extensively crossexamined on the material points and thereafter failed to appear and
cannot be produced despite a warrant for his arrest
PARTY CALLING THE FOLLOWING WITNESSES ARE NOT BOUND BY THEIR
TESTIMONY:
1. adverse party
2. hostile witness;
3. unwilling witness.
HOSTILE WITNESS A witness may be considered as unwilling or hostile only if so
declared by the court upon adequate showing of:
ihis adverse interest; or
iunjustified reluctance to testify; or
ihis having misled the party into calling him to the witness stand.
Section 9. Recalling witness.
GENERAL RULE: After the examination of a witness by both sides has been concluded,
the witness cannot be recalled without leave of court.
EXCEPTION:
ithe examination has not been concluded
irecall has been expressly reserved with the approval of the court
Section 10. Leading and misleading questions.
LEADING QUESTION—Question which suggests to the witness the answer which the
examining party desires.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. On preliminary matters;
2. On crossexamination;
3. To adverse party witness;
4. To hostile witness;
5. To unwilling witness;
6. To children of tender age;
7. To deafmutes;
8. To those who are ignorant;
9. To those who are of weak minds;
10. To the officers of the adverse party who is a juridical person.
Under the Rule on examination of a child witness, corroboration shall not be required of
a testimony of a child. His testimony, if credible by itself, shall be sufficient to support a
finding of fact, conclusion, or judgment subject to the standard of proof required in
criminal and noncriminal cases (Sec. 22 of the Rule on examination of a child witness).
MISLEADING QUESTION one which assumes as true a fact not yet testified to by the
witness, or contrary to that which he has previously stated. It is NOT allowed.
Exceptions:
1. when waived
2. asking hypothetical questions to an expert witness
Only one counsel should be allowed to examine a witness in a single stage. However,
the other counsel may make objection to testimony.
REASONS:
1. To protect the witness from undue and confusing interrogation; and
2. To secure system and brevity by giving the control of the interrogation to a single
hand.
WHEN QUESTION PRELIMINARY—when the question does not touch on any issue.
A question that merely suggests a subject without suggesting an answer or a specific
thing is not a leading question. Example: “State whether anything occurred between you
and the defendants on the evening of January 9, 1913”.
Section 11. Impeachment of adverse party’s witness.
WAYS OF IMPEACHING ADVERSE PARTY’S WITNESS:
1. By contradictory evidence;
2. By evidence that the general reputation for truth, honesty, or integrity of the witness is
bad; or
3. By prior inconsistent statements.
PROCEDURE FOR IMPEACHING WITNESS BY EVIDENCE OF PRIOR INCONSISTENT
STATEMENTS (“LAYING THE PREDICATE”)
1. The statement must be related to him with the circumstances of the times and places
and the persons present;
Ùif the statement be in writing they must be shown to the witness before any
question is put to him concerning them; and
2. He must be asked whether he made such statements, and if so, allowed to EXPLAIN
them.
NOTE: Where the previous statements of a witness are offered as evidence of an
admission, and not merely to impeach him, the rule on laying the predicate does not
apply.
Section 13. How witness impeached by evidence of inconsistent statements.
GENERAL RULE: a party who voluntarily offers the testimony of a witness in the case is
bound by the testimony of the said witness.
EXCEPTIONS:
1. in the case of a hostile witness
2. where the witness is the adverse party or the representative of a judicial person which
is the adverse party; and
3. when the witness is not voluntarily offered but is required by law to be presented by
the proponent as in the case of subscribing witness
Section 16. When witness may refer to memorandum.
REVIVAL OF PRESENT MEMORY/ PRESENT RECOLLECTION REVIVED A witness may
be allowed to refresh his memory respecting a fact, by anything written or recorded by
himself or under his direction as the time when the fact occurred, or immediately
thereafter.
PAST RECOLLECTION RECORDED/REVIVAL OF PAST RECOLLECTION A witness may
also testify from such writing or record, though he retains no recollection of the
particular facts, if he is able to swear that the writing or record correctly stated the
transaction when made, but such evidence must be received with caution.
PRESENT MEMORY PAST RECOLLECTION
REVIVED RECORDED
Memory is obscure but Recollection is zero
there is still memory;
The main evidence is The main evidence is
the testimony of the the memorandum.
witness and the
memorandum;
The witness simply Witness must swear
testifies that he knows that the writing
that the memorandum correctly states the
is correctly written by transaction.
him or under his
direction; no need to
swear.
The memorandum from which the witness may be permitted to refresh his memory
need not be an original writing. It is sufficient if it is shown that the witness knows the
copy to be a true one, and his memory refreshed thereby enables him to testify from his
own recollection of the facts, independent of his confidence in the accuracy of the copy.
Section 17. When part of transaction, writing or record given in evidence, the remainder
admissible.
RULE ON COMPLETENESS—When part of an act, declaration, conversation, writing or
record is given in evidence by one party, the whole of the same subject may be inquired
into by the other, and when a detached act, declaration, conversation, writing, or record
is given in evidence, any other act, declaration, conversation, writing or record necessary
may also be given in evidence.
AUTHENTICATION AND PROOF OF DOCUMENTS
Section 19. Classes of documents.
AUTHENTICATION—PROVING the due execution and genuineness of the document.
CLASSES OF DOCUMENTS:
For the purpose of their presentation in evidence, documents are either in public or
private (Sec. 19).
PUBLIC DOCUMENTS:
1. The written official acts, or records of the official acts of the sovereign authority,
official bodies and tribunals, and public officers, whether of the Philippines, or of a
foreign country;
2. Documents acknowledged before a notary public except last wills and testaments;
and
3. Public records, kept in the Philippines, of private documents required by law to be
entered therein.
PUBLIC WRITING DISTINGUISHED FROM PRIVATE WRITING:
PUBLIC PRIVATE WRITIN
WRITING G
As to a public a private writing
authenticity document is must be proved
admissible relative to its
evidence, due execution
without further and
proof of its genuinenessits
genuineness authenticity
and due before it may be
execution received in
evidence.
As to persons a public a private writing
bound instrument is binds only the
evidence even parties who
against third executed them
persons, of the or their privies,
fact which gave insofar as due
rise to its due execution and
execution and date of the
to the date of document are
the latter; concerned.
As to validity certain
of certain transactions
transactions must be in a
public
document,
otherwise they
will not be
given any
validity.
The following are private writings which may be admitted in evidence without previous
proof of its authenticity and due execution:
1. When the genuineness and due execution of the document is admitted by the
adverse party;
2. When such genuineness and due execution are immaterial to the issue;
3. When the document is an ANCIENT DOCUMENT;
NOTE: Ancient Document Rule applies only if there are no other witnesses to determine
authenticity.
ECOMMERCE LAW
R.A. 8792
Electronic Document – It refers to information or representation of information, date,
figures, symbols by which a right is established or an obligation extinguished, or which a
fact may be proved and affirmed which is received, recorded, transmitted, stored,
processed, retrieved or produced electronically.
Electronic Data Message – refers to information generated, sent, received or stored by
electronic, optical or similar means.
Electronic Signature – refers to any distinctive mark, characteristic and/or sound in
electronic form, representing the identity of a person and attached to or logically
associated with the electronic data message or electronic document or any methodology
or procedures employed or adopted by a person and executed or adopted by such
person with the intention of authenticating or approving an electronic data message or
electronic document.
REQUISITES FOR THE ADMISSIBILITY OF ELECTRONIC DOCUMENT:
a. Where the law required a document to be in writing, the requirement is met by an
electronic document if the said electronic document maintains
its integrity and reliability and can be authenticated so as be usable for subsequent
reference.
(i) The electronic document has remained complete and unaltered, apart from the
addition of any endorsement and any authorized change or any change which
arises in the normal course of communication, storage and display; and
(ii) The electronic document is reliable in the light of the purpose for which it was
generated and in the light of all relevant circumstances.
b. Paragraph (a) applies whether the requirement therein is in the form of an obligation or
whether the law simply provides consequences for the document not being
presented or retained in its original form.
c. Where the law requires that the document be presented or retained in its original
form, that requirement is met by an electronic document if
(i) There exist a reliable assurance as to the integrity of the document from the time
it was first generated in its final form; and
(ii) That document is capable of being displayed to the person to whom it is to be
presented; provided that no provision of his act shall apply to vary any and all
requirements of existing laws on formalities required in the execution of
documents for their validity.
For evidentiary purposes, an electronic document shall be the functional equivalent of a
written document under existing laws.
BURDEN OF PROOF: The person seeking to introduce an electronic data message or
elctronic document in any legal proceeding has the burden of proving its authenticity by
evidence capable of supporting a finding that the electronic data message or electronic
document is what the person claims to be.
RULES ON ELECTRONIC EVIDENCE
(August 1, 2001)
Manner of Authentication of electronic documents:
1. By evidence that it has been digitally signed by the person purported to have signed
the same;
2. By evidence that other appropriate security procedures or devices as may be
authorized by the Supreme Court or by law for authentication of electronic documents
were applied to the document.
3. By other evidence showing its integrity and reliability to the satisfaction of the judge.
Authentication of Electronic Signatures:
1. The electronic signature is that of the person to whom it correlates;
2. By any other means provided by law;
3. By any other means satisfactory to the judge as establishing the genuineness of the
electronic signature.
Business Records as Exception to the Hearsay Rule:
A memorandum, report, record or data compilation of acts, events, conditions, opinions
or diagnoses, made by electronic, optical, or other similar means at or near the time of or
from transmission or supply of information by a person with knowledge thereof, and kept
in the regular course or conduct of business activity, and such was the regular practice
to make the memorandum, report, record or data compilation by electronic, optical, or
similar means, all of which are shown by the testimony of the custodian or other qualified
witnesses, is excepted from the rule on hearsay evidence.
This presumption may be overcome by evidence of the untrustworthiness of the source
of information or the method or circumstances of the preparation, transmission or
storage thereof.
METHOD OF PROOF:
All matters relating to the admissibility and evidentiary weight of electronic document
may be established by an affidavit stating facts of direct personal knowledge of the
affiant or based on authentic records . The affidavit must affirmatively show the
competence of the affiant to testify on the matters contained therein.
Cross Examination: The affiant shall be made to affirm the contents of the affidavit in
open court and may be crossexamined as a matter of right by the adverse party.
C. OFFER AND OBJECTION
Section 34. Offer of evidence.
Why purpose of offer must be specified — to determine whether that piece of evidence
should be admitted or not.
Because such evidence may be admissible for several purposes under the doctrine of
multiple admissibility, or may be admissible for one purpose and not for another,
otherwise the adverse party cannot interpose the proper objection. Evidence submitted
for one purpose may not be considered for any other purpose.
NOTE: Where the evidence is inadmissible for the purpose stated in the offer, it must be
rejected, though the same may be admissible for another purpose. The reason is that the
adverse party is prevented from objecting to the admissibility thereof on grounds other
than those available to meet the stated purpose.
In Mata Vda. De Onate vs. CA, the Court allowed evidence not formally offered to be
admitted and considered by the trial court provided the following requirements are
present:
1. the same must have been duly identified by testimony duly recorded;
2. the same must have been incorporated to the records of the case.
Section 35. When to make offer.
WHEN OFFER OF TESTIMONIAL/ORAL EVIDENCE MADE—at the time the witness is
called to testify.
There is another kind of offer: AN IMPLIED OFFER. Every time a question is asked of a
witness, there is an implied automatic offer of the evidence sought to be enlisted by the
question. If there is any objection to the question, the same must be raised immediately,
otherwise, there is a waiver, because there is an implied automatic offer of evidence for
every specific evidence called for by a specific question.
THEREFORE, oral evidence is always being offered twice:
1. before the witness testifies; and
2. every time a question is asked of him.
WHEN OFFER OF DOCUMENTARY AND OBJECT EVIDENCE SHOULD BE MADE—after
the party has presented his testimonial evidence. Before he rests, he must make a
formal offer of all his documentary and object evidence and specify the purposes for
which he is offering these evidence.
PROCEDURE BEFORE DOCUMENTARY AND OBJECT EVIDENCE CAN BE CONSIDERED
BY THE COURT:
1.marking;
2.identification;
3.authentication;
4.formal offer; and
5.if the evidence is excluded, an offer of proof.
Of course, you can dispense with authentication and identification if there is a stipulation
on the due execution and genuineness of the document.
a. if it is a private document, then there is a need for a stipulation on that.
b. if it is a public document, then there is a need for authentication.
STAGES IN THE PRESENTATION OF DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE:
1. IDENTIFICATION
By identification is meant a proof that the document being presented is the same one referred
to by the witness in his testimony.
2. MARKING
All exhibit should be marked to facilitate their identification. The marking may be made at
the pretrial or during the trial.
The plaintiff and the prosecution use capital letters (“A”, “B”, “C”, etc.) and the accused use
Arabic numbers (“1”, “2”, “3”, etc.)
If the exhibit is presented in connection with an affidavit, like in support or in opposition to a
motion to dismiss, the words “Motion to Dismiss” should be added after the letter or number.
3. AUTHENTICATION
The proof of a document’s due execution and genuineness if the purpose is to show that it is
genuine, or the proof of its forgery, if the purpose is to show that the document is a forgery.
4. INSPECTION
Under Section 18 of Rule 132, whenever a writing is shown to a witness, it may be
inspected by the adverse party.
5. FORMAL OFFER
After the termination of the testimonial evidence, the proponent will then make a formal offer
and state the purpose for which the document is presented (Rule 132, Sec. 34)
6. OBJECTIONS
The objection to the introduction or presentation of the document shall be made when it is
formally offered in evidence (Rule 132, Sec. 36)
There is a distinction between identification of documentary evidence and formal offer of
documentary evidence as an exhibit:
a. In identification of documentary evidence, the same is done in the course of the trial
and is accompanied by the marking of the evidence as an exhibit.
2. In formal offer of a documentary evidence as an exhibit, the same is done when the
party has presented his testimonial evidence.
The mere fact that a particular document is identified and marked as an exhibit does not
mean that it will be or has been offered as part of the evidence of the party. The party
may decide to formally offer it if it believes this will advance its cause, and then again it
may decide not to do so at all.
Section 36. Objection
MODES OF EXCLUDING INADMISSIBLE EVIDENCE:
1. Objectionwhen the evidence is offered.
2. Motion to strike out or Expunge – proper in the following cases:
a. when the witness answers prematurely before there is reasonable
opportunity for the party to object (Sec. 39);
b. unresponsive answers;
c. answers that are incompetent, irrelevant, or improper (Sec. 39);
d. uncompleted testimonies where there was no opportunity for the other party
to crossexamine.
Section 40. Tender of excluded evidence
What is meant by “tender of excluded evidence”?
Where the court refuses to permit the counsel to present testimony which he thinks is
competent, material and necessary to prove his case, the method of properly preserving
the record to the end that the question may be saved for the purpose of review, is
through the making of an offer of proof (tender of excluded evidence).
PURPOSES:
1. to inform the court what is expected to be proved; and
2. procuring exceptions to the exclusion of the offered evidence so that the appellate
court may determine from the record whether the proposed evidence is competent.
How made?
a. As to documentary or object evidence:
May have the same attached to or made part of the record.
b. As to oral evidence:
May state for the record the name and other personal circumstances of the witness
and the substance of the proposed testimony.
OFFER OFFER OF EVIDENCE
OFPROOF/TENDER OF
EXCLUDED EVIDENCE
Only resorted to if Refers to testimonial,
admission is refused documentary or object
by the court for evidence that are
purposes of review on presented or offered in
appeal. court by a party so that
the court can consider
his evidence when it
comes to the
preparation of the
decision
RULE ON CONTINUING OBJECTIONS – If the same class of evidence is presented by a
proponent and it is objected to by the adverse party, and a court has already made a
ruling on the objection, the adverse party does not have to repeat the objection all over
again. The adverse party can just tell the court that he is giving a continuing objection to
the line of question propounded. The advantage of this, is on appeal, it will appear on the
record of the case that there is an objection made in the trial court. It is always important
that the records indicate that an objection has been made because an objection that has
not been made is a waiver.
Evidence presented during the hearing of the motions will also be considered evidence
during trial of the case.
RULE 133
WEIGHT AND SUFFICIENCY OF EVIDENCE
WEIGHT OF EVIDENCE—probative value or credit that the court gives to particular
evidence admitted to prove a fact in issue.
Section 1. Preponderance of evidence, how determined.
PREPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE—evidence which is of greater weight or more
convincing or superior weight of evidence than that which is offered in opposition to it.
REASONABLE DOUBT — doubt engendered by an investigation of the whole proof and
an inability, after such investigation, to let the mind rest easy upon the certainty of
guilt. Absolute certainty of guilt is not demanded by the law to convict a person charged
for the commission of an offense, but moral certainty is requires as to every proposition
of proof requisite to constitute the offense.
EQUIPONDERANCE OF EVIDENCE — The evidence of both parties when placed on the
division scale is balance. In civil cases, this means that the court will rule in favor of the
party who has no burden of proof. In criminal cases, this means acquittal of the accused.
POSITIVE TESTIMONY DISTINGUISHED FROM NEGATIVE TESTIMONY:
POSITIVE TESTIMONY—is when the witness affirms that a fact did or did not occur;
NEGATIVE TESTIMONY—is when a witness states that he did not see or know of the
occurrence of a fact.
Positive testimony has greater weight than negative evidence.
ALIBI must be established by positive, clear and satisfactory evidence.
Requisites:
1. showing that not only is the accused somewhere else
2. but also it was physically impossible for him to be at the scene of the crime at the
time of its commission.
One of the weakest defenses because of the facility with which it can be fabricated.
OUT OF COURT IDENTIFICATION: The Supreme Court has held that on the admissibility
and reliability of outofcourt identification of suspects, courts have adopted the “totality
of circumstances” test which utilizes the following factors:
1. the witness’ opportunity to view the criminal at the time of the crime;
2. the witness’ degree of attention at that time;
3. the accuracy of any prior description given by the witness;
4. the level of certainty demonstrated by the witness at the identification;
5. the length of time between the crime and the identification; and
6. the suggestiveness of the identification procedure
RES IPSA LOQUITUR (The thing speaks for itself) a maxim for the rule that the fact of the
occurrence of an injury, taken with the surrounding circumstances, may permit an
inference or raise a presumption of negligence, or make out a plaintiff’s prima facie case,
and present a question of fact for the defendant to meet with an explanation. The
doctrine is simply a recognition of postulate that as a matter of common knowledge and
experience, the very nature of certain types of occurrences may justify an inference of
negligence on the part of person who controls the instrumentality causing the injury, in
the absence of some explanation by him. However, it does not dispense with the
requirement of proof of negligence.
RULE ON PARTIAL CREDIBILITY:
Falsus in uno, Falsus in omnibus (False in one thing, false in everything)
If the testimony of the witness on a material issue is willfully false and given with an
intention to deceive, court may disregard all the witness’ testimony.
IMPORTANT:
a. Deals only with the weight of evidence and not a positive rule of law.
b. The witnesses’ false or exaggerated statements on other matters shall not preclude
the acceptance of such evidence as is relieved from any sign of falsehood.
c. The court may accept and reject portions of the witness’ testimony depending on the
inherent credibility thereof.
This is NOT a mandatory rule of evidence but is applied by the courts in its discretion.
Section. 3 Extrajudicial confession, not sufficient ground for conviction.
An extrajudicial confession is not sufficient ground for conviction UNLESS corroborated
by evidence of corpus delicti.
CORPUS DELICTI—the actual commission by someone of the particular crime charged.
2 Elements:
1. the existence of a certain act or result which is the basis of the criminal charge
2. the existence of a criminal agency as the cause of the act or result.
NOTE: The identity of the accused is not a necessary element of the corpus delicti.
Section 4. Circumstantial evidence, when sufficient.
It is sufficient for conviction if:
a. There is more than one circumstance;
b. The facts from which the inferences are derived are proven; and
c. The combination of all the circumstances is such as to produce a conviction beyond
reasonable doubt.
Direct evidence distinguished from circumstantial evidence.
Circumstantial
Direct Evidence
Evidence
establishes the does not prove the
existence of a fact in existence of a fact in
issue without the aid of issue directly, but merely
any inference or provides for logical
presumption. inference that such fact
really exists.
the witnesses testify each proof is given of
directly of their own facts and circumstances
knowledge as to the from which the court
main facts to be proved. may infer other
connected facts which
reasonably follow,
according to the
common experience of
mankind.
Home
Subscribe to: Posts (Atom)
Watermark theme. Powered by Blogger.